From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Cristian Ciocaltea" <cristian.ciocaltea@collabora.com>
Cc: vkoul@kernel.org, olteanv@gmail.com,
linux-phy@lists.infradead.org, neil.armstrong@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] phy: rockchip: samsung-hdptx: Handle uncommitted PHY config changes
Date: Tue, 12 May 2026 23:57:10 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260512235710.A6AC1C2BCB0@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260511-hdptx-clk-fixes-v2-2-664e41379cab@collabora.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 4 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] Abuse of CCF determine_rate corrupts the clock tree rate cache.
- [High] Ignored return value in clk_ops.prepare masks hardware initialization failures.
- [High] Missing mutual exclusion between CCF and PHY frameworks causes concurrent hardware corruption.
- [High] Unbalanced PHY usage count on lane mode configuration failure in rk_hdptx_phy_power_on.
--
commit 53b6461d3d35f9f83438d0a57cf5379f7c1fcba8
Author: Cristian Ciocaltea <cristian.ciocaltea@collabora.com>
phy: rockchip: samsung-hdptx: Handle uncommitted PHY config changes
Any changes to the PHY link rate and/or color depth done via the HDMI
PHY configuration API are not immediately programmed into the hardware,
but are delayed until the PHY usage count gets incremented from 0 to 1,
that is when it is powered on or when the PLL clock exposed through
the CCF API is prepared, whichever comes first.
[ ... ]
> diff --git a/drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-samsung-hdptx.c b/drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-samsung-hdptx.c
> index 7fb1c22318bbf..12c259d9544cf 100644
> --- a/drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-samsung-hdptx.c
> +++ b/drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-samsung-hdptx.c
> @@ -1347,25 +1354,22 @@ static int rk_hdptx_phy_consumer_get(struct rk_hdptx_phy *hdptx)
> return 0;
>
> ret = regmap_read(hdptx->grf, GRF_HDPTX_STATUS, &status);
> - if (ret)
> - goto dec_usage;
> -
> - if (status & HDPTX_O_PLL_LOCK_DONE)
> - dev_warn(hdptx->dev, "PLL locked by unknown consumer!\n");
> + if (ret) {
> + atomic_dec(&hdptx->usage_count);
> + return ret;
> + }
>
> if (mode == PHY_MODE_DP) {
> rk_hdptx_dp_reset(hdptx);
> } else {
> - ret = rk_hdptx_pll_cmn_config(hdptx);
> - if (ret)
> - goto dec_usage;
> + /*
> + * Ignore PLL config errors at this point as pll_config_dirty
> + * was not reset and, therefore, operation will be retried.
> + */
> + rk_hdptx_pll_cmn_config(hdptx);
> }
>
> return 0;
Does dropping the return value of rk_hdptx_pll_cmn_config() mask hardware
initialization failures?
If pll_config_dirty is false (for example, the clock was previously prepared
and unprepared), a subsequent failure won't be retried later.
Also, if a caller invokes clk_prepare_enable() but not clk_set_rate() or
phy_power_on(), will the hardware remain unconfigured while CCF incorrectly
assumes the clock is running?
> @@ -1700,16 +1704,20 @@ static int rk_hdptx_phy_power_on(struct phy *phy)
> if (ret)
> rk_hdptx_phy_consumer_put(hdptx, true);
> } else {
> - regmap_write(hdptx->grf, GRF_HDPTX_CON0,
> - HDPTX_MODE_SEL << 16 | FIELD_PREP(HDPTX_MODE_SEL, 0x0));
> + if (hdptx->pll_config_dirty)
> + ret = rk_hdptx_pll_cmn_config(hdptx);
>
> - if (hdptx->hdmi_cfg.mode == PHY_HDMI_MODE_FRL)
> - ret = rk_hdptx_frl_lcpll_mode_config(hdptx);
> - else
> - ret = rk_hdptx_tmds_ropll_mode_config(hdptx);
> + if (!ret) {
> + regmap_write(hdptx->grf, GRF_HDPTX_CON0,
> + HDPTX_MODE_SEL << 16 | FIELD_PREP(HDPTX_MODE_SEL, 0x0));
>
> - if (ret)
> + if (hdptx->hdmi_cfg.mode == PHY_HDMI_MODE_FRL)
> + ret = rk_hdptx_frl_lcpll_mode_config(hdptx);
> + else
> + ret = rk_hdptx_tmds_ropll_mode_config(hdptx);
> + } else {
> rk_hdptx_phy_consumer_put(hdptx, true);
> + }
> }
If rk_hdptx_tmds_ropll_mode_config() or rk_hdptx_frl_lcpll_mode_config()
fails, ret is set but the else block is never executed. Does this leave
usage_count unbalanced and prevent the PHY from being powered down? I noted
this was addressed later in the series by commit "phy: rockchip:
samsung-hdptx: Drop TMDS rate setup workaround", but wanted to point it out.
Also, does this logic introduce a race condition between CCF (clk_prepare)
and the PHY framework (phy_power_on)? The usage_count is atomic, but there
appears to be no mutual exclusion for the hardware configuration itself.
If Thread A calls clk_prepare() and increments the count to 1, it starts the
lengthy rk_hdptx_pll_cmn_config() hardware sequence.
If Thread B calls phy_power_on() concurrently and increments the count to 2,
it returns immediately from rk_hdptx_phy_consumer_get(). Thread B will then
evaluate hdptx->pll_config_dirty, see it is still true, and concurrently
execute rk_hdptx_pll_cmn_config() while Thread A is already modifying the
same registers.
> @@ -2303,8 +2314,19 @@ static int rk_hdptx_phy_clk_determine_rate(struct clk_hw *hw,
> {
> struct rk_hdptx_phy *hdptx = to_rk_hdptx_phy(hw);
>
> - if (hdptx->hdmi_cfg.mode == PHY_HDMI_MODE_FRL)
> - return hdptx->hdmi_cfg.rate;
> + /*
> + * Invalidate current clock rate to ensure rk_hdptx_phy_clk_set_rate()
> + * will be invoked to commit PLL configuration.
> + */
> + if (hdptx->pll_config_dirty) {
> + req->rate = 0;
> + return 0;
> + }
Does returning req->rate = 0 here corrupt the clock tree rate cache?
By returning 0 to bypass CCF's optimization and force set_rate(), the Common
Clock Framework will cache 0 Hz as the actual hardware rate and propagate it
downstream.
Could this cause downstream consumers (like the VOP2 display clock dclk)
or rate change notifiers to receive 0 Hz, potentially leading to
division-by-zero errors or broken pixel clock math?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260511-hdptx-clk-fixes-v2-0-664e41379cab@collabora.com?part=2
--
linux-phy mailing list
linux-phy@lists.infradead.org
https://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-phy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-12 23:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-11 18:21 [PATCH v2 0/6] phy: rockchip: samsung-hdptx: Clock fixes and API transition cleanups Cristian Ciocaltea
2026-05-11 18:21 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] phy: rockchip: samsung-hdptx: Fix rate recalculation for high bpc Cristian Ciocaltea
2026-05-12 22:51 ` sashiko-bot
2026-05-13 16:12 ` Cristian Ciocaltea
2026-05-11 18:21 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] phy: rockchip: samsung-hdptx: Handle uncommitted PHY config changes Cristian Ciocaltea
2026-05-12 23:57 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-05-11 18:21 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] phy: rockchip: samsung-hdptx: Drop TMDS rate setup workaround Cristian Ciocaltea
2026-05-11 18:21 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] phy: rockchip: samsung-hdptx: Drop restrict_rate_change handling Cristian Ciocaltea
2026-05-11 18:21 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] phy: rockchip: samsung-hdptx: Simplify GRF access with FIELD_PREP_WM16() Cristian Ciocaltea
2026-05-11 18:21 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] phy: rockchip: samsung-hdptx: Consistently use bitfield macros Cristian Ciocaltea
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260512235710.A6AC1C2BCB0@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=cristian.ciocaltea@collabora.com \
--cc=linux-phy@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=neil.armstrong@linaro.org \
--cc=olteanv@gmail.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox