linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 3/3] clk: qcom: Set BRANCH_HALT

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 4 Nov 2016 14:39:01 +0530
From:   "Sricharan" <sricharan@...eaurora.org>
To:     "'Stephen Boyd'" <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     <mturquette@...libre.com>, <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <rnayak@...eaurora.org>, <stanimir.varbanov@...aro.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 3/3] clk: qcom: Set BRANCH_HALT_DELAY flags for venus core0/1 clks

Hi,
>
>A better design would be to check if the associated GDSC is in hw
>control mode and then skip the checks because the clocks are no
>longer under the control of the registers. I presume we only
>enable the clocks here to turn on parent clocks which don't turn
>on/off automatically, i.e. the PLL.
>
I was thinking clocks in the powerdomain still needs to be turned
on explicitly, these are branch clocks, irrespective of the PLLs.
Putting the gdsc in hw_ctrl, only makes the polling on their status
invalid. Anyways would be good to be aligned on this.

>Given that hw control is a static decision I guess that is an
>over-engineered solution though? The problem is that this seems
>brittle because we have to keep two things in sync, the branches
>and the gdsc. So I guess this is ok, but it deserves a comment
>like "GDSC is in HW control" so we know what's going on. Also the
>commit text could be more explicit that clocks within the gdsc
>power domain don't work when the gdsc is off, and with hw control
>of a gdsc we can't tell when the gdsc may be off or on.
>

ok, i will reword the commit log better as above.

So i understand its ok to continue with this way of checking ?
since we are always having a static association which never changes,
than introducing additional fields in the clk_branch which can
get the status of the gdsc.

Regards,
 Sricharan