From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D813C4332F for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2022 14:35:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231965AbiBYOgY (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Feb 2022 09:36:24 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:58764 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S241817AbiBYOgR (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Feb 2022 09:36:17 -0500 Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F1E61AE656 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2022 06:35:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CFD55C0167; Fri, 25 Feb 2022 09:35:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 25 Feb 2022 09:35:44 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cerno.tech; h=cc :cc:content-transfer-encoding:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender :subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; bh=/Pux1x/j+FdD9SocQt+NA8O1F6+Czi T6i6SEuoESi+0=; b=D8Wi5vonLFtHhaifjZADWajfBaJuSoNHyrtzCZHxtggZ0+ 3KDL3Xrx0Pcv9CL2mj71wETpUI19/qRcmxdZ7b+lfmeBan3sX4rZSv9Po+ETO4nW FPTrS86G8gTbq1OcGpKrHQdwx2OvZh2zBg6oQO9d5Ns39FxBSz7mfemhZNyjjR25 A2rovVzMr/nkfoyZUFDqSvXZxDcM/ialTulp9LIwZvUJaqtQ8++jrfbmWILl7rLp 9xvJMxTQIFmTexdwhPCiIt+l5Mlr4jo9gDAx7FxMF1oxgh7aVMaqVxpGscy8duPO khsqYQGAq883gL4SsRrLclSwQo1wW3VWL5sMKpvA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:date:date :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=/Pux1x /j+FdD9SocQt+NA8O1F6+CziT6i6SEuoESi+0=; b=TmXD/jfJSU2uFbC8ux/F0A 6W1I4Pku4Wh9oM7kttpd1kGyCUgF/+HoaD/i4UuRqCX3ilRvC/zsNUqZCqnxDe5j FVbjJ6tYHz605JBenf8R3mqx3nXaOqlOn5cHknt5MHDiqs8fV6d/BV++Dy4fMtwU F3uV96dIcL25o61CiFizDZZdOMyqMvsvAIO++bbC6q2toFNLsPtEF2ulrmppDa77 HmKSQNZ/VbCBCRSKl3s6ovgQPrbKhH4ekbMpYAWGrjNotIk4y/0cHfDihirPz4nv v0qNxBQYzIxkZ99kz4OLBZFl14t0EekQPI9QZcAdxeEjxLvaSOEgl85foQsBHPEA == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvvddrleeggdeijecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkofgjfhgggfestdekredtredttdenucfhrhhomhepofgrgihimhgv ucftihhprghrugcuoehmrgigihhmvgestggvrhhnohdrthgvtghhqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpedvkeelveefffekjefhffeuleetleefudeifeehuddugffghffhffehveevheeh vdenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmrg igihhmvgestggvrhhnohdrthgvtghh X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 25 Feb 2022 09:35:43 -0500 (EST) From: Maxime Ripard To: Mike Turquette , Stephen Boyd Cc: Dave Stevenson , Phil Elwell , Tim Gover , Dom Cobley , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, Maxime Ripard Subject: [PATCH v7 04/12] clk: Always clamp the rounded rate Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2022 15:35:26 +0100 Message-Id: <20220225143534.405820-5-maxime@cerno.tech> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.35.1 In-Reply-To: <20220225143534.405820-1-maxime@cerno.tech> References: <20220225143534.405820-1-maxime@cerno.tech> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-clk@vger.kernel.org The current core while setting the min and max rate properly in the clk_request structure will not make sure that the requested rate is within these boundaries, leaving it to each and every driver to make sure it is. It's not clear if this was on purpose or not, but this introduces some inconsistencies within the API. For example, a user setting a range and then calling clk_round_rate() with a value outside of that range will get the same value back (ignoring any driver adjustements), effectively ignoring the range that was just set. Another one, arguably worse, is that it also makes clk_round_rate() and clk_set_rate() behave differently if there's a range and the rate being used for both is outside that range. As we have seen, the rate will be returned unchanged by clk_round_rate(), but clk_set_rate() will error out returning -EINVAL. Let's make sure the framework will always clamp the rate to the current range found on the clock, which will fix both these inconsistencies. Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard --- drivers/clk/clk.c | 2 ++ drivers/clk/clk_test.c | 50 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c index 112911138a7b..6c4e10209568 100644 --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c @@ -1348,6 +1348,8 @@ static int clk_core_determine_round_nolock(struct clk_core *core, if (!core) return 0; + req->rate = clamp(req->rate, req->min_rate, req->max_rate); + /* * At this point, core protection will be disabled * - if the provider is not protected at all diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk_test.c b/drivers/clk/clk_test.c index a8d7eba01de7..2279be699001 100644 --- a/drivers/clk/clk_test.c +++ b/drivers/clk/clk_test.c @@ -310,8 +310,7 @@ static void clk_range_test_multiple_disjoints_range(struct kunit *test) /* * Test that if our clock has some boundaries and we try to round a rate - * lower than the minimum, the returned rate won't be affected by the - * boundaries. + * lower than the minimum, the returned rate will be within range. */ static void clk_range_test_set_range_round_rate_lower(struct kunit *test) { @@ -328,18 +327,20 @@ static void clk_range_test_set_range_round_rate_lower(struct kunit *test) rate = clk_round_rate(clk, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1 - 1000); KUNIT_ASSERT_GT(test, rate, 0); - KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, rate, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1 - 1000); + KUNIT_EXPECT_GE(test, rate, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1); + KUNIT_EXPECT_LE(test, rate, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2); } /* * Test that if our clock has some boundaries and we try to set a rate - * lower than the minimum, we'll get an error. + * higher than the maximum, the new rate will be within range. */ static void clk_range_test_set_range_set_rate_lower(struct kunit *test) { struct clk_dummy_context *ctx = test->priv; struct clk_hw *hw = &ctx->hw; struct clk *clk = hw->clk; + unsigned long rate; KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, clk_set_rate_range(clk, @@ -347,15 +348,21 @@ static void clk_range_test_set_range_set_rate_lower(struct kunit *test) DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2), 0); - KUNIT_ASSERT_LT(test, + KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, clk_set_rate(clk, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1 - 1000), 0); + + rate = clk_get_rate(clk); + KUNIT_ASSERT_GT(test, rate, 0); + KUNIT_EXPECT_GE(test, rate, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1); + KUNIT_EXPECT_LE(test, rate, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2); } /* * Test that if our clock has some boundaries and we try to round and - * set a rate lower than the minimum, the values won't be consistent - * between clk_round_rate() and clk_set_rate(). + * set a rate lower than the minimum, the rate returned by + * clk_round_rate() will be consistent with the new rate set by + * clk_set_rate(). */ static void clk_range_test_set_range_set_round_rate_consistent_lower(struct kunit *test) { @@ -373,17 +380,16 @@ static void clk_range_test_set_range_set_round_rate_consistent_lower(struct kuni rounded = clk_round_rate(clk, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1 - 1000); KUNIT_ASSERT_GT(test, rounded, 0); - KUNIT_EXPECT_LT(test, + KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, clk_set_rate(clk, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1 - 1000), 0); - KUNIT_EXPECT_NE(test, rounded, clk_get_rate(clk)); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, rounded, clk_get_rate(clk)); } /* * Test that if our clock has some boundaries and we try to round a rate - * higher than the maximum, the returned rate won't be affected by the - * boundaries. + * higher than the maximum, the returned rate will be within range. */ static void clk_range_test_set_range_round_rate_higher(struct kunit *test) { @@ -400,18 +406,20 @@ static void clk_range_test_set_range_round_rate_higher(struct kunit *test) rate = clk_round_rate(clk, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2 + 1000); KUNIT_ASSERT_GT(test, rate, 0); - KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, rate, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2 + 1000); + KUNIT_EXPECT_GE(test, rate, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1); + KUNIT_EXPECT_LE(test, rate, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2); } /* * Test that if our clock has some boundaries and we try to set a rate - * lower than the maximum, we'll get an error. + * higher than the maximum, the new rate will be within range. */ static void clk_range_test_set_range_set_rate_higher(struct kunit *test) { struct clk_dummy_context *ctx = test->priv; struct clk_hw *hw = &ctx->hw; struct clk *clk = hw->clk; + unsigned long rate; KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, clk_set_rate_range(clk, @@ -419,15 +427,21 @@ static void clk_range_test_set_range_set_rate_higher(struct kunit *test) DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2), 0); - KUNIT_ASSERT_LT(test, + KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, clk_set_rate(clk, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2 + 1000), 0); + + rate = clk_get_rate(clk); + KUNIT_ASSERT_GT(test, rate, 0); + KUNIT_EXPECT_GE(test, rate, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1); + KUNIT_EXPECT_LE(test, rate, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2); } /* * Test that if our clock has some boundaries and we try to round and - * set a rate higher than the maximum, the values won't be consistent - * between clk_round_rate() and clk_set_rate(). + * set a rate higher than the maximum, the rate returned by + * clk_round_rate() will be consistent with the new rate set by + * clk_set_rate(). */ static void clk_range_test_set_range_set_round_rate_consistent_higher(struct kunit *test) { @@ -445,11 +459,11 @@ static void clk_range_test_set_range_set_round_rate_consistent_higher(struct kun rounded = clk_round_rate(clk, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2 + 1000); KUNIT_ASSERT_GT(test, rounded, 0); - KUNIT_EXPECT_LT(test, + KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, clk_set_rate(clk, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2 + 1000), 0); - KUNIT_EXPECT_NE(test, rounded, clk_get_rate(clk)); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, rounded, clk_get_rate(clk)); } /* -- 2.35.1