| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <f8d47ea1-446a-f714-94ce-a819ed9256a3@mleia.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 23:19:34 +0300
From: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vz@...ia.com>
To: gabriel.fernandez@...com
Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
Nicolas Pitre <nico@...aro.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
daniel.thompson@...aro.org, andrea.merello@...il.com,
radoslaw.pietrzyk@...il.com, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Sylvain Lemieux <slemieux.tyco@...il.com>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
ludovic.barre@...com, olivier.bideau@...com,
amelie.delaunay@...com, gabriel.fernandez.st@...il.com,
Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] clk: stm32h7: Add stm32h743 clock driver
Hello Gabriel,
On 07/18/2017 10:53 AM, gabriel.fernandez@...com wrote:
> From: Gabriel Fernandez <gabriel.fernandez@...com>
>
> This patch enables clocks for STM32H743 boards.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gabriel Fernandez <gabriel.fernandez@...com>
>
> for MFD changes:
> Acked-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
>
> for DT-Bindings
> Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
> ---
> .../devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32h7-rcc.txt | 81 ++
> drivers/clk/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/clk/clk-stm32h7.c | 1522 ++++++++++++++++++++
> include/dt-bindings/clock/stm32h7-clks.h | 165 +++
> include/dt-bindings/mfd/stm32h7-rcc.h | 136 ++
> 5 files changed, 1905 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32h7-rcc.txt
> create mode 100644 drivers/clk/clk-stm32h7.c
> create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/clock/stm32h7-clks.h
> create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/mfd/stm32h7-rcc.h
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32h7-rcc.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32h7-rcc.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..e41e4ac
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32h7-rcc.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,81 @@
> +STMicroelectronics STM32H7 Reset and Clock Controller
> +=====================================================
> +
> +The RCC IP is both a reset and a clock controller.
> +
> +Please refer to clock-bindings.txt for common clock controller binding usage.
> +Please also refer to reset.txt for common reset controller binding usage.
> +
> +Required properties:
> +- compatible: Should be:
> + "st,stm32h743-rcc"
> +
> +- reg: should be register base and length as documented in the
> + datasheet
> +
> +- #reset-cells: 1, see below
> +
> +- #clock-cells : from common clock binding; shall be set to 1
> +
> +- clocks: External oscillator clock phandle
> + - high speed external clock signal (HSE)
> + - low speed external clock signal (LSE)
> + - external I2S clock (I2S_CKIN)
> +
> +- st,syscfg: phandle for pwrcfg, mandatory to disable/enable backup domain
> + write protection (RTC clock).
> +
please make a clear decision if "st,syscfg" property is mandatory or not.
>From the driver code this property is optional, and the clock driver
is expected to work properly, if the property is omitted. Do I miss
anything?
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-stm32h7.c b/drivers/clk/clk-stm32h7.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..2608c40
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-stm32h7.c
[snip]
> +static const char * const ltdc_src[] = {"pll3_r"};
> +
> +/* Power domain helper */
> +static inline void disable_power_domain_write_protection(void)
> +{
> + if (pdrm)
> + regmap_update_bits(pdrm, 0x00, (1 << 8), (1 << 8));
> +}
> +
> +static inline void enable_power_domain_write_protection(void)
> +{
> + if (pdrm)
> + regmap_update_bits(pdrm, 0x00, (1 << 8), (0 << 8));
(0 << 8) is zero.
> +}
IMHO a version below is better:
static inline void enable_power_domain_write_protection(bool enable)
{
if (pdrm)
regmap_update_bits(pdrm, 0x00, BIT(8), enable ? 0x0: BIT(8));
}
> +
> +static inline bool is_enable_power_domain_write_protection(void)
is_enabled_...
> +{
> + if (pdrm) {
> + u32 val;
> +
> + regmap_read(pdrm, 0x00, &val);
> +
> + return !(val & 0x100);
> + }
> + return 0;
> +}
Please replace (1 << 8) and 0x100 all above with a macro or at least
BIT(8).
> +
> +/* Gate clock with ready bit and backup domain management */
> +struct stm32_ready_gate {
> + struct clk_gate gate;
> + u8 bit_rdy;
> + u8 backup_domain;
> +};
> +
> +#define to_ready_gate_clk(_rgate) container_of(_rgate, struct stm32_ready_gate,\
> + gate)
> +
> +#define RGATE_TIMEOUT 10000
> +
> +static int ready_gate_clk_enable(struct clk_hw *hw)
> +{
> + struct clk_gate *gate = to_clk_gate(hw);
> + struct stm32_ready_gate *rgate = to_ready_gate_clk(gate);
> + int dbp_status;
> + int bit_status;
> + unsigned int timeout = RGATE_TIMEOUT;
> +
> + if (clk_gate_ops.is_enabled(hw))
> + return 0;
> +
> + dbp_status = is_enable_power_domain_write_protection();
> +
> + if (rgate->backup_domain && dbp_status)
> + disable_power_domain_write_protection();
> +
> + clk_gate_ops.enable(hw);
> +
> + /* We can't use readl_poll_timeout() because we can blocked if
> + * someone enables this clock before clocksource changes.
> + * Only jiffies counter is available. Jiffies are incremented by
> + * interruptions and enable op does not allow to be interrupted.
> + */
> + do {
> + bit_status = !(readl(gate->reg) & BIT(rgate->bit_rdy));
> +
> + if (bit_status)
> + udelay(100);
> +
> + } while (bit_status && --timeout);
> +
> + if (rgate->backup_domain && dbp_status)
> + enable_power_domain_write_protection();
> +
> + return bit_status;
> +}
I'm not convinced that the repetitive lockless pattern
dbp_status = is_enable_power_domain_write_protection();
if (dbp_status)
disable_power_domain_write_protection();
do_something();
if (dbp_status)
enable_power_domain_write_protection();
is correct in a concurrent environment.
You still have a risk of running do_something() *after* a call of
enable_power_domain_write_protection().
The best option for you is either to switch to ordinary power domains
and use their API or to move the driver to use regmaps, and at least
in the latter case you don't need to wrap your code by CCF code (!),
and as a result you don't need to export truly internal to CCF function
clk_gate_is_enabled().
--
With best wishes,
Vladimir
Powered by blists - more mailing lists