Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751413AbaBWSqu (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Feb 2014 13:46:50 -0500 Received: from mail-ea0-f174.google.com ([209.85.215.174]:47077 "EHLO mail-ea0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751295AbaBWSqt (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Feb 2014 13:46:49 -0500 Message-ID: <530A420B.5050207@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 19:46:35 +0100 From: Tomasz Figa User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gregory CLEMENT , Mike Turquette CC: Thomas Petazzoni , Andrew Lunn , Jason Cooper , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ezequiel Garcia , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Sebastian Hesselbarth Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] clk: respect the clock dependencies in of_clk_init References: <1392054179-28830-1-git-send-email-gregory.clement@free-electrons.com> In-Reply-To: <1392054179-28830-1-git-send-email-gregory.clement@free-electrons.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Gregory, On 10.02.2014 18:42, Gregory CLEMENT wrote: > Until now the clock providers were initialized in the order found in > the device tree. This led to have the dependencies between the clocks > not respected: children clocks could be initialized before their > parent clocks. > > Instead of forcing each platform to manage its own initialization order, > this patch adds this work inside the framework itself. > > Using the data of the device tree the of_clk_init function now delayed > the initialization of a clock provider if its parent provider was not > ready yet. In general this is really great. It's a first step towards sorting out dependencies between clock providers correctly. I have some comments inline, though. > > The strict dependency check (all parents of a given clk must be > initialized) was added by Boris BREZILLON Shouldn't this be reflected by a tag of this patch? If you squash a patch signed off by someone then I believe their sign-off tag should be added to the base patch. Correct me if I'm wrong, though. > > Signed-off-by: Gregory CLEMENT > --- > > Since the v1, I have merged the strict dependency check from Boris. > And of course tested on my Armada 370 and Armada XP based board > > drivers/clk/clk.c | 109 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 106 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c > index 5517944495d8..684976993297 100644 > --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c > +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c > @@ -2526,24 +2526,127 @@ const char *of_clk_get_parent_name(struct device_node *np, int index) > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_clk_get_parent_name); > > +struct clock_provider { The name is a bit too generic and slightly misleading. IMHO struct deferred_clk_provider (and deferred_clk_providers for the list) would be better. > + of_clk_init_cb_t clk_init_cb; > + struct device_node *np; > + struct list_head node; > +}; > + > +static LIST_HEAD(clk_provider_list); > + > +/* > + * This function looks for a parent clock. If there is one, then it > + * checks that the provider for this parent clock was initialized, in > + * this case the parent clock will be ready. > + */ > +static int parent_ready(struct device_node *np) > +{ > + struct of_phandle_args clkspec; > + struct of_clk_provider *provider; > + int num_parents; > + bool found; > + int i; > + > + /* > + * If there is no clock parent, no need to wait for them, then > + * we can consider their absence as being ready > + */ > + num_parents = of_count_phandle_with_args(np, "clocks", "#clock-cells"); > + if (num_parents <= 0) > + return 1; of_clk_get_parent_count() can be used here... > + > + for (i = 0; i < num_parents; i++) { > + if (of_parse_phandle_with_args(np, "clocks", "#clock-cells", i, > + &clkspec)) > + return 1; > + > + /* Check if we have such a provider in our array */ > + found = false; > + list_for_each_entry(provider, &of_clk_providers, link) { > + if (provider->node == clkspec.np) { > + found = true; > + break; > + } > + } > + > + if (!found) > + return 0; > + } ...or even better, __of_clk_get_from_provider() could modified to return -EPROBE_DEFER if requested provider is not registered and you could simply call of_clk_get(np, i) and handle its return value appropriately: - on !IS_ERR(clk) call clk_put() and continue with iterations, - on IS_ERR(clk) && PTR_ERR(clk) == -EPROBE_DEFER return 0 immediately, - in any other case end the loop (end of clock specifiers). This would make CCF even closer to proper handling of provider ordering, with a nice side effect of handling deferred probe for platform devices. > + > + return 1; > +} > + > /** > * of_clk_init() - Scan and init clock providers from the DT > * @matches: array of compatible values and init functions for providers. > * > - * This function scans the device tree for matching clock providers and > - * calls their initialization functions > + * This function scans the device tree for matching clock providers > + * and calls their initialization functions. It also do it by trying > + * to follow the dependencies. > */ > void __init of_clk_init(const struct of_device_id *matches) > { > const struct of_device_id *match; > struct device_node *np; > + struct clock_provider *clk_provider, *next; > + bool is_init_done; > > if (!matches) > matches = &__clk_of_table; > > for_each_matching_node_and_match(np, matches, &match) { > of_clk_init_cb_t clk_init_cb = match->data; > - clk_init_cb(np); > + > + > + if (parent_ready(np)) { > + /* > + * The parent clock is ready or there is no > + * clock parent at all, in this case the > + * provider can be initialize immediately. > + */ > + clk_init_cb(np); > + } else { > + /* > + * The parent clock is not ready, this > + * provider is moved to a list to be > + * initialized later > + */ > + struct clock_provider *parent = kzalloc(sizeof(struct clock_provider), > + GFP_KERNEL); > + > + parent->clk_init_cb = match->data; > + parent->np = np; > + list_add(&parent->node, &clk_provider_list); > + } > + } I wonder if this couldn't be replaced with simply adding all the providers to the list first and then proceeding with the loop below to handle the registrations. > + > + while (!list_empty(&clk_provider_list)) { > + is_init_done = false; > + list_for_each_entry_safe(clk_provider, next, > + &clk_provider_list, node) { > + if (parent_ready(clk_provider->np)) { > + clk_provider->clk_init_cb(clk_provider->np); > + list_del(&clk_provider->node); > + kfree(clk_provider); > + is_init_done = true; > + } > + } > + > + if (!is_init_done) { > + /* > + * We didn't managed to initialize any of the > + * remaining providers during the last loop, > + * so now we initialize all the remaining ones > + * unconditionally in case the clock parent > + * was not mandatory > + */ > + list_for_each_entry_safe(clk_provider, next, > + &clk_provider_list, node) { > + clk_provider->clk_init_cb(clk_provider->np); > + list_del(&clk_provider->node); > + kfree(clk_provider); Hmm, this is basically the code above repeated without the if. What about something like the code snippet below? bool force = false; while (!list_empty(&clk_provider_list)) { is_init_done = false; list_for_each_entry_safe(clk_provider, next, &clk_provider_list, node) { if (force || parent_ready(clk_provider->np)) { clk_provider->clk_init_cb(clk_provider->np); list_del(&clk_provider->node); kfree(clk_provider); is_init_done = true; } } if (!is_init_done) force = true; } Best regards, Tomasz -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/