From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B983C433E0 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2020 09:28:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 235D520772 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2020 09:28:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="bLRqT77Y"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=cerno.tech header.i=@cerno.tech header.b="gGxoGVWl"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="U/9yUmpt" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 235D520772 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=cerno.tech Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=up6YMqCm6hCmNI5cqDL31tozPamNgHASwmG5vzbQWcg=; b=bLRqT77Yj99Hst GF+PrInDrsxRwo1i6KMGAcQybpezAWl2fmrfcclUqWgavg2G/jlVCLvze3CJV59BbA+zegImj7zE/ 0L9wlVD4OHKQdoSHIZ7HF5Y8oYgQ0mCycc+phEKRaSe3hPUPumRWu3P3Q5/l9gHc6Gb8jOnVMkBl7 8IApwxovMmXrriQ9pZXZ/59G+9K8zDbScncSclGXMR/5fCv9dJwvdIRHpr9eUtSCqAyaDStVa1RR7 uG4BKq7K6pMLOH+znVe9fNurG9QBPOEVsmaGXIpmEm7UodmF5dPIR+cXFR6ZPDjybdxlceiwwN5XM kL+bwBjBLb2n/bKqiFxA==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jh8eC-000634-5f; Fri, 05 Jun 2020 09:28:20 +0000 Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com ([64.147.123.19]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jh8e5-0005sG-AZ; Fri, 05 Jun 2020 09:28:15 +0000 Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16D90993; Fri, 5 Jun 2020 05:28:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 05 Jun 2020 05:28:07 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cerno.tech; h= date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; s=fm3; bh=u ayn6jo7ImJYjdlSiOadfkn6my1yynKqoqutqre9njM=; b=gGxoGVWl0d10b8/67 usbzFBkOj/G/QK+zNYA8TYPV7Z2PlS/qBKPwwFa2/nrW0WV8N+/kNGjuuZbglrj6 zIoAdkeLWWhiFlp++ritI5YhEU0MQs8LLW5ePiFzmpblMDmFbz1ZEvoYS4HoAJ3N GJFHMnj5EFp4DeXfRt6HIxVmbtvjw+hThVbSOlQKvL67WjtAJuiHpl9VCbty1wTr MOAAJ+VIFBnb6As+0/1lVGOZAD0BCVp2rE7dTWIfM0HhkBP5iG5anh0zVr1vDVcZ 9y8o+5XXYbWuTCTOpSl/HkJbd7JYqUKkU4i5VKhJKSZOEnzzjmFNHJlsSL205myh 1JPWA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=uayn6jo7ImJYjdlSiOadfkn6my1yynKqoqutqre9n jM=; b=U/9yUmptNwqwVmCPjAst3HBHXETZDP+uL5Yev9vm1VxuyBioL7R6diOSo hXw6RAy3nC8s22mUIHdM3FRKJWAPLNHeXpkZtLBSYO8N/2UtQ3dccKkTCya4YD8U cx0MJELjtLOXKNMQMTm5JkN5xL0AZ4IJN8dmpWOE4sPNuv4aNGjIEnSoAcjqMwSO xOZTgYxhOcKKrRI21+ptmF84vCSNnHCC4Ia4ZJIZ/LAWSDiNVszJOBm5SnWTWoNK Ccyt5wDA6l/ZkjcrFacbXEScIkaaDEt/UEXxEOd2eZTY2RWQQoi8iBEZcaXO/+Wh pc6b6+UHJAw6kdFQ8+gxEjRfkOycA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrudegfedgudefucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepfffhvffukfhfgggtugfgjgesthhqredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepofgrgihi mhgvucftihhprghrugcuoehmrgigihhmvgestggvrhhnohdrthgvtghhqeenucggtffrrg htthgvrhhnpefgjeettdejgffgffdvteeutdehtdehgeehueetkeefgefhtdetjeekledu gedvudenucfkphepledtrdekledrieekrdejieenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtne curfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmrgigihhmvgestggvrhhnohdrthgvtghh X-ME-Proxy: Received: from localhost (lfbn-tou-1-1502-76.w90-89.abo.wanadoo.fr [90.89.68.76]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 351523280060; Fri, 5 Jun 2020 05:28:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 11:28:02 +0200 From: Maxime Ripard To: Nicolas Saenz Julienne Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 12/25] clk: bcm: rpi: Use CCF boundaries instead of rolling our own Message-ID: <20200605092802.xkoazjnin7xyqkoy@gilmour.lan> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200605_022813_471930_DEF02AB0 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 14.25 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Tim Gover , Dave Stevenson , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com, linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Phil Elwell , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hi Nicolas, On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 08:02:22PM +0200, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote: > On Wed, 2020-05-27 at 17:45 +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > The raspberrypi firmware clock driver has a min_rate / max_rate clamping by > > storing the info it needs in a private structure. > > > > However, the CCF already provides such a facility, so we can switch to it > > to remove the boilerplate. > > > > Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard > > --- > > drivers/clk/bcm/clk-raspberrypi.c | 18 ++++++++---------- > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/bcm/clk-raspberrypi.c b/drivers/clk/bcm/clk- > > raspberrypi.c > > index a20492fade6a..e135ad28d38d 100644 > > --- a/drivers/clk/bcm/clk-raspberrypi.c > > +++ b/drivers/clk/bcm/clk-raspberrypi.c > > @@ -36,9 +36,6 @@ struct raspberrypi_clk { > > struct rpi_firmware *firmware; > > struct platform_device *cpufreq; > > > > - unsigned long min_rate; > > - unsigned long max_rate; > > - > > struct clk_hw pllb; > > }; > > > > @@ -142,13 +139,11 @@ static int raspberrypi_fw_pll_set_rate(struct clk_hw > > *hw, unsigned long rate, > > static int raspberrypi_pll_determine_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, > > struct clk_rate_request *req) > > { > > - struct raspberrypi_clk *rpi = container_of(hw, struct raspberrypi_clk, > > - pllb); > > u64 div, final_rate; > > u32 ndiv, fdiv; > > > > /* We can't use req->rate directly as it would overflow */ > > - final_rate = clamp(req->rate, rpi->min_rate, rpi->max_rate); > > + final_rate = clamp(req->rate, req->min_rate, req->max_rate); > > > > div = (u64)final_rate << A2W_PLL_FRAC_BITS; > > do_div(div, req->best_parent_rate); > > @@ -215,12 +210,15 @@ static int raspberrypi_register_pllb(struct > > raspberrypi_clk *rpi) > > dev_info(rpi->dev, "CPU frequency range: min %u, max %u\n", > > min_rate, max_rate); > > > > - rpi->min_rate = min_rate * RPI_FIRMWARE_PLLB_ARM_DIV_RATE; > > - rpi->max_rate = max_rate * RPI_FIRMWARE_PLLB_ARM_DIV_RATE; > > - > > rpi->pllb.init = &init; > > > > - return devm_clk_hw_register(rpi->dev, &rpi->pllb); > > + ret = devm_clk_hw_register(rpi->dev, &rpi->pllb); > > + if (!ret) > > + clk_hw_set_rate_range(&rpi->pllb, > > + min_rate * RPI_FIRMWARE_PLLB_ARM_DIV_RATE, > > + max_rate * > > RPI_FIRMWARE_PLLB_ARM_DIV_RATE); > > Isn't there a potential race here? Albeit unlikely, cpufreq could show > up and call clk_round_rate() in between the registration and you > setting the ranges. IIRC, driver's probe are not called in parallel but in sequence, so we should be covered here. Maxime _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel