Received: by 2002:ac0:aa62:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id w31-v6csp1056366ima; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 13:38:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5dwcIOxxhcxcNy53G394BaEMA5mOmsfLv/KBvnYmPnCEI3sjQbRmCRVcCMj1BQmmy53urB6 X-Received: by 2002:a63:a552:: with SMTP id r18mr3908689pgu.176.1540413488387; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 13:38:08 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1540413488; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=KmVc4m9QJW9tfnsA32EkMJ0Uz/EHFmEYyCu1X4xlW3qpHjAlz0NtkJCwYeSYH4YoUy yjsAU/VBPC8ifCamOPxpkUVJnYIw/DyBj2+RQRaDQQ4I8VlGIgIDXVbAoP2nsTpBNXUB KXyOv9HnqyEcsythuGA3/LNCRhjZL//rzJwGM2b5sPbmoSEceP4AVuv3sW5CTbXhY2Lz VhbozIU0M5ATSdwjn/4lyZjpvlwtCHzY+4mPa3BIEu5pzRHlnN2kcCMaxa4nxXyUYGKZ 6EvphL50we+MhPjErGdXuqU5o+BhtnXjQMVpECnw1UbyJDk4whiamjKrg0AFm5QIS9Ib ynmQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=q4abWt6Azqf1YQmw1y70q75Yp/KE52BXQU2mIJ85B+Y=; b=PAwrNYwCO3LJBBB1i7/tJgP1VlKd2I5E/twIfZOhozij/0A6D23wPHVmxoYa0XP7cL Sk+plxLA428a0syNNE/ld7Uw80jeBmvNfY2Kndzikm9ZHDfCNVh0ZjD012ecMieP1ceJ e9k8HNK3iYRayFwjoJEGxTeIPtg6cc2EZWhJ9buCdvrJ3nDUt+U3fhmOWD8QDIFAYcyU iamAT2Gnq7/hkixErtWbMTPugfiLY1xLzQc/9Oy7es7OIWP20Nxqx686ppbhFDI9k0vV 9n35SPOFsgcRrT4EfMP09YVJp9/WEkafaO37YEIKW9VvcstzwDpLxyy+XiUpkV9FbCE3 3lvQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@chromium.org header.s=google header.b=kKfjND2v; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=chromium.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id e9-v6si5422372pgo.567.2018.10.24.13.37.36; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 13:38:08 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@chromium.org header.s=google header.b=kKfjND2v; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=chromium.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726804AbeJYFG2 (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 25 Oct 2018 01:06:28 -0400 Received: from mail-it1-f195.google.com ([209.85.166.195]:37756 "EHLO mail-it1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725873AbeJYFG1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2018 01:06:27 -0400 Received: by mail-it1-f195.google.com with SMTP id e74-v6so8351826ita.2 for ; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 13:36:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=q4abWt6Azqf1YQmw1y70q75Yp/KE52BXQU2mIJ85B+Y=; b=kKfjND2vp0xH3FdHZFem8YvoST850GZ80TCXCIY4sLWehU3JdMzA+hDpXfIKz/556E e+/A4phasUx6eJqUDXxjy3VPDTcJS45Yo+mVSJH9Icom5mVOowfHXCfTEgUt8E12mg8O wSpTSvRaFTHhkdAJecWcu5E/Zwzch2u0hJRA8= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=q4abWt6Azqf1YQmw1y70q75Yp/KE52BXQU2mIJ85B+Y=; b=J0ubHV5x+tL4SH1Q2ZNFkQkQ9qekBlD2/3R9YWzU1uTB7e3f09Vuw5aEEmALvUSnK5 nJLXarUEs8oFYO2GU3H9sz5S9aySkFBLp0JcScZEouXmjXrpO8Kq4owr/4izHnfTmh08 flT2mS7liHNLhVJwUT3a0jbo7XL9bx6WA1vwbB7txqbqMeEJergFlh/HOiESGqqEU9kf IFe/wLYFQ1XDFd5spsZ3Mx2mV/QmEVEYrhHtnRR/QjIYAmbXhLRnifUYQrZ9oXMgxNCq xARRNPU+s1T5X10gbSooJK0ysrz+mTFn3lA4909pxwdzm4fpilZ6bL2VHxKFhttrozBT 1c3Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gKKHjUMzlLjAdWmnDeUqT9mSpQhJmFOHwGwWN5Ypfhsa0RXP5Pu mTW/meAy59/KumtMrRbWdpQFGB+VNq0IRbvtZ1Fg1g== X-Received: by 2002:a24:dbc3:: with SMTP id c186-v6mr2540480itg.123.1540413413923; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 13:36:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20181024013132.115907-1-dbasehore@chromium.org> <20181024013132.115907-2-dbasehore@chromium.org> <264adf2a81bcd602f2a58e4a46c3273cd7c77ca2.camel@baylibre.com> In-Reply-To: <264adf2a81bcd602f2a58e4a46c3273cd7c77ca2.camel@baylibre.com> From: "dbasehore ." Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2018 13:36:42 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] clk: Remove recursion in clk_core_{prepare,enable}() To: jbrunet@baylibre.com Cc: linux-kernel , linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, sboyd@kernel.org, Michael Turquette , =?UTF-8?Q?Heiko_St=C3=BCbner?= , aisheng.dong@nxp.com, mchehab+samsung@kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet , Stephen Boyd Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 2:51 AM Jerome Brunet wrote: > > On Tue, 2018-10-23 at 18:31 -0700, Derek Basehore wrote: > > From: Stephen Boyd > > > > Enabling and preparing clocks can be written quite naturally with > > recursion. We start at some point in the tree and recurse up the > > tree to find the oldest parent clk that needs to be enabled or > > prepared. Then we enable/prepare and return to the caller, going > > back to the clk we started at and enabling/preparing along the > > way. > > > > The problem is recursion isn't great for kernel code where we > > have a limited stack size. Furthermore, we may be calling this > > code inside clk_set_rate() which also has recursion in it, so > > we're really not looking good if we encounter a tall clk tree. > > > > Let's create a stack instead by looping over the parent chain and > > collecting clks of interest. Then the enable/prepare becomes as > > simple as iterating over that list and calling enable. > > Hi Derek, > > What about unprepare() and disable() ? > > This patch removes the recursion from the enable path but keeps it for the > disable path ... this is very odd. Assuming doing so works, It certainly makes > CCF a lot harder to understand. It wasn't there in the original patch. I asked Stephen, and he thinks it may have been left that way because unprepare/disable are tail recursion cases, which the compiler can optimize away. > > What about clock protection which essentially works on the same model as prepare > and enable ? > > Overall, this change does not look like something that should be merged as it > is. If you were just seeking comments, you should add the "RFC" tag to your > series. > > Jerome. > > > > > Cc: Jerome Brunet > > If you don't mind, I would prefer to get the whole series next time. It helps to > get the context. > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd > > Signed-off-by: Derek Basehore > > --- > > drivers/clk/clk.c | 113 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- > > 1 file changed, 64 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c > > index af011974d4ec..95d818f5edb2 100644 > > --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c > > +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c > > @@ -71,6 +71,8 @@ struct clk_core { > > struct hlist_head children; > > struct hlist_node child_node; > > struct hlist_head clks; > > + struct list_head prepare_list; > > + struct list_head enable_list; > > unsigned int notifier_count; > > #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS > > struct dentry *dentry; > > @@ -740,49 +742,48 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(clk_unprepare); > > static int clk_core_prepare(struct clk_core *core) > > { > > int ret = 0; > > + struct clk_core *tmp, *parent; > > + LIST_HEAD(head); > > > > lockdep_assert_held(&prepare_lock); > > > > - if (!core) > > - return 0; > > + while (core) { > > + list_add(&core->prepare_list, &head); > > + /* Stop once we see a clk that is already prepared */ > > + if (core->prepare_count) > > + break; > > + core = core->parent; > > + } > > > > - if (core->prepare_count == 0) { > > - ret = clk_pm_runtime_get(core); > > - if (ret) > > - return ret; > > + list_for_each_entry_safe(core, tmp, &head, prepare_list) { > > + list_del_init(&core->prepare_list); > > Is there any point in removing it from the list ? > Maybe I missed it but it does not seems useful. > > Without this, we could use list_for_each_entry() > > > > > - ret = clk_core_prepare(core->parent); > > - if (ret) > > - goto runtime_put; > > + if (core->prepare_count == 0) { > > Should we really check the count here ? You are not checking the count when the > put() counterpart is called below. > > Since PM runtime has ref counting as well, either way would work I guess ... but > we shall be consistent > > > + ret = clk_pm_runtime_get(core); > > + if (ret) > > + goto err; > > > > - trace_clk_prepare(core); > > + trace_clk_prepare(core); > > > > - if (core->ops->prepare) > > - ret = core->ops->prepare(core->hw); > > + if (core->ops->prepare) > > + ret = core->ops->prepare(core->hw); > > > > - trace_clk_prepare_complete(core); > > + trace_clk_prepare_complete(core); > > > > - if (ret) > > - goto unprepare; > > + if (ret) { > > + clk_pm_runtime_put(core); > > + goto err; > > + } > > + } > > + core->prepare_count++; > > } > > > > - core->prepare_count++; > > - > > - /* > > - * CLK_SET_RATE_GATE is a special case of clock protection > > - * Instead of a consumer claiming exclusive rate control, it is > > - * actually the provider which prevents any consumer from making any > > - * operation which could result in a rate change or rate glitch while > > - * the clock is prepared. > > - */ > > - if (core->flags & CLK_SET_RATE_GATE) > > - clk_core_rate_protect(core); > > This gets removed without anything replacing it. > > is CLK_SET_RATE_GATE and clock protection support dropped after this change ? > > > - > > return 0; > > -unprepare: > > - clk_core_unprepare(core->parent); > > -runtime_put: > > - clk_pm_runtime_put(core); > > +err: > > + parent = core->parent; > > + list_for_each_entry_safe_continue(core, tmp, &head, prepare_list) > > + list_del_init(&core->prepare_list); > > + clk_core_unprepare(parent); > > If you get here because of failure clk_pm_runtime_get(), you will unprepare a > clock which may have not been prepared first > > Overall the rework of error exit path does not seem right (or necessary) > > > return ret; > > } > > > > @@ -878,37 +879,49 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(clk_disable); > > static int clk_core_enable(struct clk_core *core) > > { > > int ret = 0; > > + struct clk_core *tmp, *parent; > > + LIST_HEAD(head); > > > > lockdep_assert_held(&enable_lock); > > > > - if (!core) > > - return 0; > > - > > - if (WARN(core->prepare_count == 0, > > - "Enabling unprepared %s\n", core->name)) > > - return -ESHUTDOWN; > > + while (core) { > > + list_add(&core->enable_list, &head); > > + /* Stop once we see a clk that is already enabled */ > > + if (core->enable_count) > > + break; > > + core = core->parent; > > + } > > > > - if (core->enable_count == 0) { > > - ret = clk_core_enable(core->parent); > > + list_for_each_entry_safe(core, tmp, &head, enable_list) { > > + list_del_init(&core->enable_list); > > > > - if (ret) > > - return ret; > > + if (WARN_ON(core->prepare_count == 0)) { > > + ret = -ESHUTDOWN; > > + goto err; > > + } > > > > - trace_clk_enable_rcuidle(core); > > + if (core->enable_count == 0) { > > + trace_clk_enable_rcuidle(core); > > > > - if (core->ops->enable) > > - ret = core->ops->enable(core->hw); > > + if (core->ops->enable) > > + ret = core->ops->enable(core->hw); > > > > - trace_clk_enable_complete_rcuidle(core); > > + trace_clk_enable_complete_rcuidle(core); > > > > - if (ret) { > > - clk_core_disable(core->parent); > > - return ret; > > + if (ret) > > + goto err; > > } > > + > > + core->enable_count++; > > } > > > > - core->enable_count++; > > return 0; > > +err: > > + parent = core->parent; > > + list_for_each_entry_safe_continue(core, tmp, &head, enable_list) > > + list_del_init(&core->enable_list); > > + clk_core_disable(parent); > > + return ret; > > } > > > > static int clk_core_enable_lock(struct clk_core *core) > > @@ -3281,6 +3294,8 @@ struct clk *clk_register(struct device *dev, struct clk_hw *hw) > > core->num_parents = hw->init->num_parents; > > core->min_rate = 0; > > core->max_rate = ULONG_MAX; > > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&core->prepare_list); > > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&core->enable_list); > > hw->core = core; > > > > /* allocate local copy in case parent_names is __initdata */ > >