linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] clk: scmi: Fix min and max rate when registering clocks with discrete rates

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:   Wed, 8 Jul 2020 21:24:00 +0100
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Dien Pham <dien.pham.ry@...esas.com>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] clk: scmi: Fix min and max rate when registering
 clocks with discrete rates

On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 12:07:25PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Currently we are not initializing the scmi clock with discrete rates
> correctly. We fetch the min_rate and max_rate value only for clocks with
> ranges and ignore the ones with discrete rates. This will lead to wrong
> initialization of rate range when clock supports discrete rate.
> 
> Fix this by using the first and the last rate in the sorted list of the
> discrete clock rates while registering the clock.
> 
> Fixes: 6d6a1d82eaef7 ("clk: add support for clocks provided by SCMI")
> Reported-by: Dien Pham <dien.pham.ry@...esas.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> Hi Stephen,
> 
> If you fine, I can take this via ARM SoC along with the change in firmware
> driver. But it is fine if you want to merge this independently as it should
> be fine. Let me know either way.
> 
> Regards,
> Sudeep
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c b/drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c
> index c491f5de0f3f..ea65b7bf1408 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c
> @@ -103,6 +103,8 @@ static const struct clk_ops scmi_clk_ops = {
>  static int scmi_clk_ops_init(struct device *dev, struct scmi_clk *sclk)
>  {
>  	int ret;
> +	unsigned long min_rate, max_rate;
> +
>  	struct clk_init_data init = {
>  		.flags = CLK_GET_RATE_NOCACHE,
>  		.num_parents = 0,
> @@ -112,9 +114,23 @@ static int scmi_clk_ops_init(struct device *dev, struct scmi_clk *sclk)
> 
>  	sclk->hw.init = &init;
>  	ret = devm_clk_hw_register(dev, &sclk->hw);
> -	if (!ret)
> -		clk_hw_set_rate_range(&sclk->hw, sclk->info->range.min_rate,
> -				      sclk->info->range.max_rate);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	if (sclk->info->rate_discrete) {
> +		int num_rates = sclk->info->list.num_rates;
> +
> +		if (num_rates <= 0)
> +			return -EINVAL;
> +
> +		min_rate = sclk->info->list.rates[0]

I seem to have sent a version with ; missing above though I fixed but
sent the old stale version as I had written a note to you 🙁 

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep