From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
To: Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@nvidia.com>
Cc: Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: Re-evaluate clock rate on min/max update
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 09:46:05 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170412164605.GO7065@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1490103807-21821-1-git-send-email-pdeschrijver@nvidia.com>
On 03/21, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
> Whenever a user change its min or max rate limit of a clock, we need to
> re-evaluate the current clock rate and possibly change it if the new limits
> require so. To do this clk_set_rate_range() already calls
> clk_core_set_rate_nolock, however this won't have the intended effect
> because the core clock rate hasn't changed. To fix this, move the test to
> avoid setting the same core clock rate again, to clk_set_rate() so
> clk_core_set_rate_nolock() can change the clock rate when min or max have
> been updated, even when the core clock rate has not changed.
I'd expect some sort of Fixes: tag here? Or it never worked!?
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@nvidia.com>
I seem to recall some problems here around rate aggregation that
we fixed after the patches merged. Sorry, but I have to go back
and look at those conversations to refresh my memory and make
sure this is all fine.
Are you relying on the rate setting op to be called with the new
min/max requirements if the aggregated rate is the same? I don't
understand why clk drivers care.
> ---
> drivers/clk/clk.c | 13 +++++++------
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c
> index 2fa2fb8..0b815d1 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c
> @@ -1569,10 +1569,6 @@ static int clk_core_set_rate_nolock(struct clk_core *core,
> if (!core)
> return 0;
>
> - /* bail early if nothing to do */
> - if (rate == clk_core_get_rate_nolock(core))
> - return 0;
> -
> if ((core->flags & CLK_SET_RATE_GATE) && core->prepare_count)
> return -EBUSY;
>
> @@ -1621,16 +1617,21 @@ static int clk_core_set_rate_nolock(struct clk_core *core,
> */
> int clk_set_rate(struct clk *clk, unsigned long rate)
> {
> - int ret;
> + int ret = 0;
>
> if (!clk)
> - return 0;
> + return ret;
Why? Noise?
>
> /* prevent racing with updates to the clock topology */
> clk_prepare_lock();
>
> + /* bail early if nothing to do */
> + if (rate == clk_core_get_rate_nolock(clk->core))
> + goto out;
> +
> ret = clk_core_set_rate_nolock(clk->core, rate);
>
> +out:
> clk_prepare_unlock();
>
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-12 16:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-21 13:43 [PATCH] clk: Re-evaluate clock rate on min/max update Peter De Schrijver
2017-04-07 11:44 ` Peter De Schrijver
2017-04-12 16:46 ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2017-04-13 7:48 ` Peter De Schrijver
2017-04-28 7:17 ` Peter De Schrijver
2017-05-16 7:38 ` Peter De Schrijver
2017-06-01 9:12 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-02 10:15 ` Peter De Schrijver
2017-06-02 22:45 ` Stephen Boyd
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=20170412164605.GO7065@codeaurora.org \
--to=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mturquette@baylibre.com \
--cc=pdeschrijver@nvidia.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).