From: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com> To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com, james.quinlan@broadcom.com, jonathan.cameron@huawei.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com, etienne.carriere@linaro.org, Souvik.Chakravarty@arm.com, Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 16/16] clk: scmi: Support atomic clock enable/disable API Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 13:30:19 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20211210133019.GA6207@e120937-lin> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtCDostniAStK2zNnFa+dtd1mHJ8zywyGXX9HZYf4u6z+w@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 11:52:39AM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote: > Hi Cristian, > Hi Vincent, thanks for the feedback, my replies below. > On Mon, 29 Nov 2021 at 20:13, Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com> wrote: > > > > Support also atomic enable/disable clk_ops beside the bare non-atomic one > > (prepare/unprepare) when the underlying SCMI transport is configured to > > support atomic transactions for synchronous commands. > > > > Cc: Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com> > > Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> > > Cc: linux-clk@vger.kernel.org > > Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com> > > --- > > V5 --> V6 > > - add concurrent availability of atomic and non atomic reqs > > --- > > drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c | 56 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- > > 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c b/drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c > > index 1e357d364ca2..50033d873dde 100644 > > --- a/drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c > > +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c > > @@ -88,21 +88,53 @@ static void scmi_clk_disable(struct clk_hw *hw) > > scmi_proto_clk_ops->disable(clk->ph, clk->id); > > } > > > > +static int scmi_clk_atomic_enable(struct clk_hw *hw) > > +{ > > + struct scmi_clk *clk = to_scmi_clk(hw); > > + > > + return scmi_proto_clk_ops->enable_atomic(clk->ph, clk->id); > > +} > > + > > +static void scmi_clk_atomic_disable(struct clk_hw *hw) > > +{ > > + struct scmi_clk *clk = to_scmi_clk(hw); > > + > > + scmi_proto_clk_ops->disable_atomic(clk->ph, clk->id); > > +} > > + > > +/* > > + * We can provide enable/disable atomic callbacks only if the underlying SCMI > > + * transport for an SCMI instance is configured to handle SCMI commands in an > > + * atomic manner. > > + * > > + * When no SCMI atomic transport support is available we instead provide only > > + * the prepare/unprepare API, as allowed by the clock framework when atomic > > + * calls are not available. > > + * > > + * Two distinct sets of clk_ops are provided since we could have multiple SCMI > > + * instances with different underlying transport quality, so they cannot be > > + * shared. > > + */ > > static const struct clk_ops scmi_clk_ops = { > > .recalc_rate = scmi_clk_recalc_rate, > > .round_rate = scmi_clk_round_rate, > > .set_rate = scmi_clk_set_rate, > > - /* > > - * We can't provide enable/disable callback as we can't perform the same > > - * in atomic context. Since the clock framework provides standard API > > - * clk_prepare_enable that helps cases using clk_enable in non-atomic > > - * context, it should be fine providing prepare/unprepare. > > - */ > > .prepare = scmi_clk_enable, > > .unprepare = scmi_clk_disable, > > }; > > > > -static int scmi_clk_ops_init(struct device *dev, struct scmi_clk *sclk) > > +static const struct clk_ops scmi_atomic_clk_ops = { > > + .recalc_rate = scmi_clk_recalc_rate, > > + .round_rate = scmi_clk_round_rate, > > + .set_rate = scmi_clk_set_rate, > > + .prepare = scmi_clk_enable, > > + .unprepare = scmi_clk_disable, > > + .enable = scmi_clk_atomic_enable, > > For each clock, we have to start with clk_prepare and then clk_enable > this means that for scmi clk we will do > scmi_clk_enable > then > scmi_clk_atomic_enable > > scmi_clk_enable and scmi_clk_atomic_enable ends up doing the same > thing: scmi_clock_config_set but the atomic version doesn't sleep > > So you will set enable twice the clock. > > This is confirmed when testing your series with virtio scmi backend as > I can see to consecutive scmi clk set enable request for the same > clock > Yes, I saw that double enable while testing with CLK debugfs entry BUT I thought that was due to the design of the debugfs entries (that calls prepare_enable and so prepare and enable in sequence) also becauase, a few versions ago, this series WAS indeed providing (beside bugs :P) the sleeping prepare XOR the atomic enable depending on the SCMI atomic support state (as you are suggesting now), BUT, after a few offline chats with you, my (probably faulty) understanding was that some partners, even on a system supporting atomic SCMI transfers, would have liked to be able to call the atomic .enable selectively only on some (tipically quickly to setup) clocks while keep calling the sleeping .prepare on some other (slower ones to settle). (while keeping all the other slower clk_rate setup ops non-atomic) So in v6/v7 I changed the API to provide both sleepable and atomic clk APIs when the underlying SCMI stack support atomic mode: this way, though, it is clearly up to the caller to decide what to do and if, generally, the clock framework just calls everytime both, it will result in a double enable. Was my understanding of the reqs about being able to selectively choose the sleep_vs_atomic mode in this way wrong ? > In case of atomic mode, the clk_prepare should be a nop > I can certainly revert to use the old exclusive approach, not providing a .prepare when atomic is supported, but then all clock enable ops on any clock defined on the system will be operated atomically withot any choice when atomic SCMI transactions are available. Ideally, we could like, on a SCMI system supporting atomic, to be able to 'tag' a specific clock something like 'prefer-non-atomic' and so selectively 'noppify' the .prepare or the .enable at the SCMI clk-driver level depending on such tag, but I cannot see any way to expose this from the CLK framework API or DT, nor it seems suitable for a per-clock DT config option AND it would break the current logic of clk_is_enabled_when_prepared(). Indeed clk_is_enabled_when_prepared() logic is ALREADY broken also by this V7 since when providing also .enable/.disable on atomic transports, the core CLK framework would return clk_is_enabled_when_prepared() --> False which does NOT fit reality since our SCMI prepare/unprepare DO enable/disable clks even if .disable/.enable are provided too. Probably this last observation on clk_is_enabled_when_prepared() is enough to revert to the exclusive atomic/non-atomic approach and just ignore the customer wish to be able to selectively choose which clock to operate in atomic mode. Any thoughs before a V8 ? Thanks, Cristian
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com> To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com, james.quinlan@broadcom.com, jonathan.cameron@huawei.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com, etienne.carriere@linaro.org, Souvik.Chakravarty@arm.com, Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 16/16] clk: scmi: Support atomic clock enable/disable API Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 13:30:19 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20211210133019.GA6207@e120937-lin> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtCDostniAStK2zNnFa+dtd1mHJ8zywyGXX9HZYf4u6z+w@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 11:52:39AM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote: > Hi Cristian, > Hi Vincent, thanks for the feedback, my replies below. > On Mon, 29 Nov 2021 at 20:13, Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com> wrote: > > > > Support also atomic enable/disable clk_ops beside the bare non-atomic one > > (prepare/unprepare) when the underlying SCMI transport is configured to > > support atomic transactions for synchronous commands. > > > > Cc: Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com> > > Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> > > Cc: linux-clk@vger.kernel.org > > Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com> > > --- > > V5 --> V6 > > - add concurrent availability of atomic and non atomic reqs > > --- > > drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c | 56 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- > > 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c b/drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c > > index 1e357d364ca2..50033d873dde 100644 > > --- a/drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c > > +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c > > @@ -88,21 +88,53 @@ static void scmi_clk_disable(struct clk_hw *hw) > > scmi_proto_clk_ops->disable(clk->ph, clk->id); > > } > > > > +static int scmi_clk_atomic_enable(struct clk_hw *hw) > > +{ > > + struct scmi_clk *clk = to_scmi_clk(hw); > > + > > + return scmi_proto_clk_ops->enable_atomic(clk->ph, clk->id); > > +} > > + > > +static void scmi_clk_atomic_disable(struct clk_hw *hw) > > +{ > > + struct scmi_clk *clk = to_scmi_clk(hw); > > + > > + scmi_proto_clk_ops->disable_atomic(clk->ph, clk->id); > > +} > > + > > +/* > > + * We can provide enable/disable atomic callbacks only if the underlying SCMI > > + * transport for an SCMI instance is configured to handle SCMI commands in an > > + * atomic manner. > > + * > > + * When no SCMI atomic transport support is available we instead provide only > > + * the prepare/unprepare API, as allowed by the clock framework when atomic > > + * calls are not available. > > + * > > + * Two distinct sets of clk_ops are provided since we could have multiple SCMI > > + * instances with different underlying transport quality, so they cannot be > > + * shared. > > + */ > > static const struct clk_ops scmi_clk_ops = { > > .recalc_rate = scmi_clk_recalc_rate, > > .round_rate = scmi_clk_round_rate, > > .set_rate = scmi_clk_set_rate, > > - /* > > - * We can't provide enable/disable callback as we can't perform the same > > - * in atomic context. Since the clock framework provides standard API > > - * clk_prepare_enable that helps cases using clk_enable in non-atomic > > - * context, it should be fine providing prepare/unprepare. > > - */ > > .prepare = scmi_clk_enable, > > .unprepare = scmi_clk_disable, > > }; > > > > -static int scmi_clk_ops_init(struct device *dev, struct scmi_clk *sclk) > > +static const struct clk_ops scmi_atomic_clk_ops = { > > + .recalc_rate = scmi_clk_recalc_rate, > > + .round_rate = scmi_clk_round_rate, > > + .set_rate = scmi_clk_set_rate, > > + .prepare = scmi_clk_enable, > > + .unprepare = scmi_clk_disable, > > + .enable = scmi_clk_atomic_enable, > > For each clock, we have to start with clk_prepare and then clk_enable > this means that for scmi clk we will do > scmi_clk_enable > then > scmi_clk_atomic_enable > > scmi_clk_enable and scmi_clk_atomic_enable ends up doing the same > thing: scmi_clock_config_set but the atomic version doesn't sleep > > So you will set enable twice the clock. > > This is confirmed when testing your series with virtio scmi backend as > I can see to consecutive scmi clk set enable request for the same > clock > Yes, I saw that double enable while testing with CLK debugfs entry BUT I thought that was due to the design of the debugfs entries (that calls prepare_enable and so prepare and enable in sequence) also becauase, a few versions ago, this series WAS indeed providing (beside bugs :P) the sleeping prepare XOR the atomic enable depending on the SCMI atomic support state (as you are suggesting now), BUT, after a few offline chats with you, my (probably faulty) understanding was that some partners, even on a system supporting atomic SCMI transfers, would have liked to be able to call the atomic .enable selectively only on some (tipically quickly to setup) clocks while keep calling the sleeping .prepare on some other (slower ones to settle). (while keeping all the other slower clk_rate setup ops non-atomic) So in v6/v7 I changed the API to provide both sleepable and atomic clk APIs when the underlying SCMI stack support atomic mode: this way, though, it is clearly up to the caller to decide what to do and if, generally, the clock framework just calls everytime both, it will result in a double enable. Was my understanding of the reqs about being able to selectively choose the sleep_vs_atomic mode in this way wrong ? > In case of atomic mode, the clk_prepare should be a nop > I can certainly revert to use the old exclusive approach, not providing a .prepare when atomic is supported, but then all clock enable ops on any clock defined on the system will be operated atomically withot any choice when atomic SCMI transactions are available. Ideally, we could like, on a SCMI system supporting atomic, to be able to 'tag' a specific clock something like 'prefer-non-atomic' and so selectively 'noppify' the .prepare or the .enable at the SCMI clk-driver level depending on such tag, but I cannot see any way to expose this from the CLK framework API or DT, nor it seems suitable for a per-clock DT config option AND it would break the current logic of clk_is_enabled_when_prepared(). Indeed clk_is_enabled_when_prepared() logic is ALREADY broken also by this V7 since when providing also .enable/.disable on atomic transports, the core CLK framework would return clk_is_enabled_when_prepared() --> False which does NOT fit reality since our SCMI prepare/unprepare DO enable/disable clks even if .disable/.enable are provided too. Probably this last observation on clk_is_enabled_when_prepared() is enough to revert to the exclusive atomic/non-atomic approach and just ignore the customer wish to be able to selectively choose which clock to operate in atomic mode. Any thoughs before a V8 ? Thanks, Cristian _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-12-10 13:30 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 82+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-11-29 19:11 [PATCH v7 00/16] Introduce atomic support for SCMI transports Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` [PATCH v7 01/16] firmware: arm_scmi: Perform earlier cinfo lookup call in do_xfer Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` [PATCH v7 02/16] firmware: arm_scmi: Set polling timeout to max_rx_timeout_ms Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-12-03 20:13 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-12-03 20:13 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-12-13 11:06 ` Sudeep Holla 2021-12-13 11:06 ` Sudeep Holla 2021-11-29 19:11 ` [PATCH v7 03/16] firmware: arm_scmi: Refactor message response path Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` [PATCH v7 04/16] include: trace: Add new scmi_xfer_response_wait event Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-12-03 20:16 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-12-03 20:16 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-11-29 19:11 ` [PATCH v7 05/16] firmware: arm_scmi: Use new trace event scmi_xfer_response_wait Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-12-03 20:16 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-12-03 20:16 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-11-29 19:11 ` [PATCH v7 06/16] firmware: arm_scmi: Add configurable polling mode for transports Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-12-13 11:25 ` Sudeep Holla 2021-12-13 11:25 ` Sudeep Holla 2021-12-14 10:49 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-12-14 10:49 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` [PATCH v7 07/16] firmware: arm_scmi: Make smc transport use common completions Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` [PATCH v7 08/16] firmware: arm_scmi: Add sync_cmds_atomic_replies transport flag Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-12-13 11:54 ` Sudeep Holla 2021-12-13 11:54 ` Sudeep Holla 2021-12-14 10:52 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-12-14 10:52 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` [PATCH v7 09/16] firmware: arm_scmi: Make smc support atomic sync commands replies Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` [PATCH v7 10/16] firmware: arm_scmi: Make optee " Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` [PATCH v7 11/16] firmware: arm_scmi: Add support for atomic transports Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` [PATCH v7 12/16] firmware: arm_scmi: Add atomic mode support to smc transport Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-12-13 11:42 ` Sudeep Holla 2021-12-13 11:42 ` Sudeep Holla 2021-12-14 10:54 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-12-14 10:54 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` [PATCH v7 13/16] firmware: arm_scmi: Add new parameter to mark_txdone Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-12-03 20:17 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-12-03 20:17 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-11-29 19:11 ` [PATCH v7 14/16] firmware: arm_scmi: Add atomic mode support to virtio transport Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-12-10 12:12 ` Peter Hilber 2021-12-10 12:12 ` Peter Hilber 2021-12-20 21:30 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-12-20 21:30 ` Cristian Marussi 2022-01-18 14:20 ` Peter Hilber 2022-01-18 14:20 ` Peter Hilber 2021-12-13 11:34 ` Sudeep Holla 2021-12-13 11:34 ` Sudeep Holla 2021-12-14 10:56 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-12-14 10:56 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` [PATCH v7 15/16] firmware: arm_scmi: Add atomic support to clock protocol Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-12-03 20:16 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-12-03 20:16 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-11-29 19:11 ` [PATCH v7 16/16] clk: scmi: Support atomic clock enable/disable API Cristian Marussi 2021-11-29 19:11 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-12-03 2:06 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-12-03 2:06 ` Stephen Boyd 2021-12-03 20:17 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-12-03 20:17 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-12-10 10:52 ` Vincent Guittot 2021-12-10 10:52 ` Vincent Guittot 2021-12-10 13:30 ` Cristian Marussi [this message] 2021-12-10 13:30 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-12-10 14:27 ` Vincent Guittot 2021-12-10 14:27 ` Vincent Guittot 2021-12-10 19:36 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-12-10 19:36 ` Cristian Marussi 2021-12-13 17:52 ` [PATCH v7 00/16] (subset) Introduce atomic support for SCMI transports Sudeep Holla 2021-12-13 17:52 ` Sudeep Holla
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20211210133019.GA6207@e120937-lin \ --to=cristian.marussi@arm.com \ --cc=Souvik.Chakravarty@arm.com \ --cc=etienne.carriere@linaro.org \ --cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \ --cc=james.quinlan@broadcom.com \ --cc=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=mturquette@baylibre.com \ --cc=sboyd@kernel.org \ --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \ --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.