linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] clk: ti: check clock type before doing autoidle ops

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Mon, 3 Dec 2018 07:39:10 -0800
From:   Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
Cc:     Tero Kristo <t-kristo@...com>,
        Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info>, bcousson@...libre.com,
        letux-kernel@...nphoenux.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
        mturquette@...libre.com, paul@...an.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] clk: ti: check clock type before doing autoidle
 ops

* Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org> [181130 23:52]:
> Quoting Tony Lindgren (2018-11-30 07:37:29)
> > Hi,
> > 
> > * Tero Kristo <t-kristo@...com> [181130 09:21]:
> > > On 30/11/2018 09:57, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > > > No that is not preferred. Can the omap2_clk_deny_idle() function be
> > > > integrated closer into the clk framework in some way that allows it to
> > > > be part of the clk_ops structure? And then have that take a clk_hw
> > > > structure instead of a struct clk? I haven't looked at this in any
> > > > detail whatsoever so I may be way off right now.
> > > 
> > > It could be added under the main clk_ops struct, however this would
> > > introduce two new func pointers to it which are not used by anything else
> > > but OMAP. Are you aware of any other platforms requiring similar feature?
> > 
> > From consumer usage point of view, I'm still wondering about
> > the relationship of clk_deny_idle() and clkdm_deny_idle().
> > 
> > It seems that we need to allow reset control drivers call
> > clk_deny_idle() for the duration of reset. And it seems the
> > clk_deny_idle() should propagate to also up to the related
> > clock domain driver to do clkdm_deny_idle().
> > 
> > So maybe clk_deny_idle() is could just be something like:
> > 
> > dev = clk_get_device(clk);
> > ...
> > error = pm_runtime_get(dev);
> > ...
> > pm_runtime_put(dev);
> > ...
> > 
> > And that way it would just propagate to the parent clock
> > domain driver and the clock framework does not need to know
> > about clockdomains. A clockdomain could be just a genpd
> > domain.
> > 
> > Or do you guys have better ideas?
> > 
> 
> Wouldn't the device link in clk framework patches do this for you if we
> had the RUNTIME_PM flag passed in. If this is about keeping the clock
> controller active when a consumer device is using it then I think it may
> work.

The consumer device stays active just fine with PM runtime
calls. So yes, the problem is keeping a clock controller forced
active for the period of consumer device reset. Other than
that typically autoidle can be just kept enabled.

Below is a clarified suggested example usage if we wanted to
use PM runtime on a clock controller device from a consumer
device reset driver:

error = pm_runtime_get_dev()
...
cdev = clk_get_device(clk);
...
error = pm_runtime_get(cdev);
...
/* Do the consumer device reset here */
...
pm_runtime_put(cdev);
pm_runtime_put(dev);

Regards,

Tony