linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
	Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
	linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] clk: add more managed APIs
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 20:01:13 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170214200113.GA27312@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170214194408.GW25384@codeaurora.org>

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:44:08AM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> I'd prefer we didn't do this. Instead, make clk_put() drop any
> prepare or enables that were done via that clk pointer. Mike
> started to do this before[1], but we have some code that assumes
> it can do:
> 
> 	clk = clk_get(...)
> 	clk_prepare_enable(clk)
> 	clk_put(clk)
> 
> and have the clk stay on. Those would need to be changed.

Yes, I've seen from time to time code that plays this game over the
years.  However, from my simple grepping, it seems that we only have
a small number of cases:

arch/mips/alchemy/devboards/db1200.c:           clk_prepare_enable(c);
arch/mips/alchemy/devboards/db1200.c-           clk_put(c);

arch/mips/alchemy/devboards/db1300.c:           clk_prepare_enable(c);
arch/mips/alchemy/devboards/db1300.c-           clk_put(c);

arch/mips/alchemy/devboards/db1550.c:           clk_prepare_enable(c);
arch/mips/alchemy/devboards/db1550.c-           clk_put(c);

drivers/base/power/clock_ops.c:         clk_prepare_enable(clk);
drivers/base/power/clock_ops.c-         clk_put(clk);

drivers/mtd/nand/orion_nand.c:          clk_prepare_enable(clk);
drivers/mtd/nand/orion_nand.c-          clk_put(clk);

I've always hated that - and it goes against the API:

 * Note: drivers must ensure that all clk_enable calls made on this
 * clock source are balanced by clk_disable calls prior to calling
 * this function.

(That comment should have been updated when clk_prepare() & clk_unprepare()
was added to include balancing those.)

So really, all the cases above are buggy.  However, the statement in the
API doesn't give permission for what you're suggesting!

The suggestion requires that we also cast in stone that every "struct clk"
which is handed out from clk_get() becomes unique _everywhere_, because
that's the only way to really track the prepare/enable state on a per-
clk_get() basis, so we can properly clean up at clk_put().

However, I think we still have some non-CCF clock API implementations
around, which hand out shared "struct clk"s.  Changing this requirement
will impact those, since they would need to be updated before the change
could be made.

So, although it would be a nice change to make (which would rule out the
abuse) I don't think it's one that could be practically made at this
stage without (a) fixing all instances like those quoted above and (b)
converting all non-CCF implementations to either CCF or making them
hand out unique struct clk's.

(I do have patches which converts sa11x0 to CCF... which would be one
less non-CCF implementation.)

-- 
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.

      parent reply	other threads:[~2017-02-14 20:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-01-28 18:40 [PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2017-01-28 19:03 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2017-01-28 19:22   ` Dmitry Torokhov
2017-01-28 21:44     ` Guenter Roeck
2017-01-28 23:39       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2017-01-29 16:00         ` Guenter Roeck
2017-01-29 18:07         ` [PATCH v2] " Dmitry Torokhov
2017-01-29 18:31           ` Guenter Roeck
2017-01-30 18:55           ` Stephen Boyd
2017-01-30 19:22             ` Guenter Roeck
2017-01-30 21:42               ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2017-01-30 21:58                 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2017-01-30 22:25                   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2017-01-30 22:51                 ` Guenter Roeck
2017-01-31  8:43                   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2017-01-31  0:59               ` Dmitry Torokhov
2017-01-31 17:20                 ` Guenter Roeck
2017-01-31 18:26                   ` Dmitry Torokhov
2017-01-31 19:34                     ` Guenter Roeck
2017-01-31  0:57             ` [PATCH v3] " Dmitry Torokhov
2017-02-07  3:51               ` Dmitry Torokhov
2017-02-14 19:44                 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-02-14 19:55                   ` Dmitry Torokhov
2017-02-14 20:31                     ` Guenter Roeck
2017-02-14 20:01                   ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]

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=20170214200113.GA27312@n2100.armlinux.org.uk \
    --to=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=andy.shevchenko@gmail.com \
    --cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
    --cc=mturquette@baylibre.com \
    --cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v3] clk: add more managed APIs' \
    /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: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).