linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] cpufreq: qcom-hw: Add CPU clock provider support

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 9 Nov 2022 09:16:15 +0100
From:   Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To:     Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
Cc:     andersson@...nel.org, viresh.kumar@...aro.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, rafael@...nel.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] cpufreq: qcom-hw: Add CPU clock provider support

On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 01:31:20PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> Qcom CPUFreq hardware (EPSS/OSM) controls clock and voltage to the CPU
> cores. But this relationship is not represented with the clk framework
> so far.
> 
> So, let's make the qcom-cpufreq-hw driver a clock provider. This makes the
> clock producer/consumer relationship cleaner and is also useful for CPU
> related frameworks like OPP to know the frequency at which the CPUs are
> running.
> 
> The clock frequency provided by the driver is for each frequency domain.
> We cannot get the frequency of each CPU core because, not all platforms
> support per-core DCVS feature.
> 
> Also the frequency supplied by the driver is the actual frequency that
> comes out of the EPSS/OSM block after the DCVS operation. This frequency is
> not same as what the CPUFreq framework has set but it is the one that gets
> supplied to the CPUs after throttling by LMh.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 41 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
> index 5e0598730a04..c0e4b223f9c1 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/qcom-cpufreq-hw.c
 
> @@ -672,6 +693,26 @@ static int qcom_cpufreq_hw_driver_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  
>  		data->base = base;
>  		data->res = res;
> +
> +		/* Register CPU clock for each frequency domain */
> +		clk_init.name = devm_kasprintf(dev, GFP_KERNEL, "qcom_cpufreq%d", i);

This is still an allocation and can in theory fail.

But it is also unnecessary to keep these around after registering the
clocks so it's better to just reuse a single stack allocated buffer for
this.

> +		clk_init.flags = CLK_GET_RATE_NOCACHE;
> +		clk_init.ops = &qcom_cpufreq_hw_clk_ops;
> +		data->cpu_clk.init = &clk_init;
> +
> +		ret = devm_clk_hw_register(dev, &data->cpu_clk);
> +		if (ret < 0) {
> +			dev_err(dev, "Failed to register Qcom CPUFreq clock(%d)\n", i);

nit: This looks unnecessarily verbose. Using

	"failed to register clock %d: %d\n", i, ret

should do just fine as you are using dev_err().

> +			return ret;
> +		}
> +
> +		clk_data->hws[i] = &data->cpu_clk;
> +	}
> +
> +	ret = devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider(dev, of_clk_hw_onecell_get, clk_data);
> +	if (ret < 0) {
> +		dev_err(dev, "Failed to add Qcom CPUFreq clock provider\n");
> +		return ret;
>  	}
>  
>  	ret = cpufreq_register_driver(&cpufreq_qcom_hw_driver);

Johan