[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160202010814.GA4848@codeaurora.org>
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 17:08:14 -0800
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Cc: linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 12/16] clk: avoid circular clock topology
On 12/28, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Currently, clk_register() never checks a circular parent looping,
> but clock providers could register such an insane clock topology.
> For example, "clk_a" could have "clk_b" as a parent, and vice versa.
> In this case, clk_core_reparent() creates a circular parent list
> and __clk_recalc_accuracies() calls itself recursively forever.
>
> The core infrastructure should be kind enough to bail out, showing
> an appropriate error message in such a case. This helps to easily
> find a bug in clock providers. (uh, I made such a silly mistake
> when I was implementing my clock providers first. I was upset
> because the kernel did not respond, without any error message.)
>
> This commit adds a new helper function, __clk_is_ancestor(). It
> returns true if the second argument is a possible ancestor of the
> first one. If a clock core is a possible ancestor of itself, it
> would make a loop when it were registered. That should be detected
> as an error.
>
> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
> ---
Applied to clk-next
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Powered by blists - more mailing lists