linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 2/2] phy: exynos5-usbdrd: remove disable and enable of phy clk

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:   Mon, 9 Oct 2017 20:46:48 +0530
From:   Anand Moon <linux.amoon@...il.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>,
        Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Chunfeng Yun <chunfeng.yun@...iatek.com>,
        Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@...eaurora.org>,
        Andrzej Pietrasiewicz <andrzej.p@...sung.com>,
        devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org" 
        <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/2] phy: exynos5-usbdrd: remove disable and enable of phy clk

hi Krzysztof,

On 9 October 2017 at 02:37, Anand Moon <linux.amoon@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
>
> On 8 October 2017 at 21:20, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 08, 2017 at 06:11:12PM +0530, Anand Moon wrote:
>>> Hi Krzysztof,
>>>
>>> On 6 October 2017 at 12:12, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
>>> > On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 6:36 AM, Anand Moon <linux.amoon@...il.com> wrote:
>>> >> remove the disable and enable of phy clk.
>>> >> phy clk is needed to tune the phy controller.
>>> >
>>> > Drivers should in general enable and disable the clocks they use. Just
>>> > like in patch #1 please describe why you are doing this, what kind of
>>> > problem are you trying to solve and what exactly are you trying to do
>>> > here.
>>> >
>>> > BR,
>>> > Krzysztof
>>> >
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> Usually we would disable the clk on error patch and return with failed.
>>> but in the current code we disable the clk in init routine and
>>> enable the clk in disable routine which seem incorrect.
>>

disable of clk could affect the PMU used to control the phy driver.

>> No. For example for exynos5_usbdrd_phy_exit() the driver enables the
>> clock only for the access to PHY block (PHY registers).
>>
>
> But I dont get it why we disable code phy clk, which could be used in
> future phy tune or link control as it part of CLK_FSYS.
>
>>>
>>> [0] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/drivers/phy/samsung/phy-exynos5-usbdrd.c#L362-L412
>>> [1] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/drivers/phy/samsung/phy-exynos5-usbdrd.c#L424-L446
>>>
>>> On 3.10.x kernel clk_summary all the clk are enables.
>>>
>>>     mout_usbdrd300              3           3            24000000
>>>        dout_usbdrd300           2           2            24000000
>>>           sclk_usbdrd300        1           1            24000000
>>>        dout_usbphy300           2           2            24000000
>>>           sclk_usbphy300        1           1            24000000
>>>     mout_usbdrd301              3           3            24000000
>>>        dout_usbdrd301           2           2            24000000
>>>           sclk_usbdrd301        1           1            24000000
>>>        dout_usbphy301           2           2            24000000
>>>           sclk_usbphy301        1           1            24000000
>>>
>>> Some more changes in clk driver might be required to stabilize the usb module.
>>
>> Please describe the issues with stability first.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>>
> On stability:
>
> USB 3.0 read / write performance is not up to mark with moderate data
> read / write speed,
> If you give long compilation of kernel or any source code it would
> likely be slow
> It work pretty good with USB 3.0 SSD but generally failed with 2.5' inc HDD.
>
> If needed I will share you some performance test result with and
> without these patches.
>
> I have some more changes related to usbdrd phy change queued along this on.
>
> Best Regards
> -Anand