linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 07/65] clk: at91: sckc: Add a determine

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:   Thu, 18 May 2023 07:38:25 +0000
From:   <Claudiu.Beznea@...rochip.com>
To:     <maxime@...no.tech>, <mturquette@...libre.com>, <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        <afaerber@...e.de>, <mani@...nel.org>,
        <Nicolas.Ferre@...rochip.com>, <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>, <ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com>,
        <rf@...nsource.cirrus.com>, <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
        <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>, <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com>,
        <david@...hnology.com>, <nsekhar@...com>, <abelvesa@...nel.org>,
        <shawnguo@...nel.org>, <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        <kernel@...gutronix.de>, <festevam@...il.com>, <linux-imx@....com>,
        <matthias.bgg@...il.com>, <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        <dinguyen@...nel.org>, <pdeschrijver@...dia.com>,
        <pgaikwad@...dia.com>, <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        <jonathanh@...dia.com>, <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, <airlied@...il.com>, <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        <vkoul@...nel.org>, <kishon@...nel.org>, <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
        <wens@...e.org>, <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>, <samuel@...lland.org>,
        <lgirdwood@...il.com>, <broonie@...nel.org>, <perex@...ex.cz>,
        <tiwai@...e.com>, <paul@...pouillou.net>, <orsonzhai@...il.com>,
        <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>, <zhang.lyra@...il.com>
CC:     <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-actions@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <patches@...nsource.cirrus.com>,
        <linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
        <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
        <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, <linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev>,
        <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>, <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/65] clk: at91: sckc: Add a determine_rate hook

On 04.04.2023 13:10, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> The SAM9x5 slow clock implements a mux with a set_parent hook, but
> doesn't provide a determine_rate implementation.
> 
> This is a bit odd, since set_parent() is there to, as its name implies,
> change the parent of a clock. However, the most likely candidate to
> trigger that parent change is a call to clk_set_rate(), with
> determine_rate() figuring out which parent is the best suited for a
> given rate.
> 
> The other trigger would be a call to clk_set_parent(), but it's far less
> used, and it doesn't look like there's any obvious user for that clock.
> 
> So, the set_parent hook is effectively unused, possibly because of an
> oversight. However, it could also be an explicit decision by the
> original author to avoid any reparenting but through an explicit call to
> clk_set_parent().
> 
> The latter case would be equivalent to setting the flag
> CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT, together with setting our determine_rate hook
> to __clk_mux_determine_rate(). Indeed, if no determine_rate
> implementation is provided, clk_round_rate() (through
> clk_core_round_rate_nolock()) will call itself on the parent if
> CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT is set, and will not change the clock rate
> otherwise. __clk_mux_determine_rate() has the exact same behavior when
> CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT is set.
> 
> And if it was an oversight, then we are at least explicit about our
> behavior now and it can be further refined down the line.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech>

Reviewed-by: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...rochip.com>

Tested-by: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...rochip.com>

> ---
>  drivers/clk/at91/sckc.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/at91/sckc.c b/drivers/clk/at91/sckc.c
> index fdc9b669f8a7..9c42961a8a2f 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/at91/sckc.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/at91/sckc.c
> @@ -310,6 +310,7 @@ static u8 clk_sam9x5_slow_get_parent(struct clk_hw *hw)
>  }
> 
>  static const struct clk_ops sam9x5_slow_ops = {
> +       .determine_rate = __clk_mux_determine_rate,
>         .set_parent = clk_sam9x5_slow_set_parent,
>         .get_parent = clk_sam9x5_slow_get_parent,
>  };
> @@ -337,7 +338,7 @@ at91_clk_register_sam9x5_slow(void __iomem *sckcr,
>         init.ops = &sam9x5_slow_ops;
>         init.parent_names = parent_names;
>         init.num_parents = num_parents;
> -       init.flags = 0;
> +       init.flags = CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT;
> 
>         slowck->hw.init = &init;
>         slowck->sckcr = sckcr;
> 
> --
> 2.39.2
>