openwrt/target/linux/bcm27xx/patches-5.15/950-0837-clk-Drop-the-rate-range-on-clk_put.patch
John Audia a39dca7ead kernel: bump 5.15 to 5.15.138
Changelog: https://cdn.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v5.x/ChangeLog-5.15.138

Removed upstreamed:
	generic/backport-5.15/819-v6.6-0018-nvmem-imx-correct-nregs-for-i.MX6SLL.patch[1]
	generic/backport-5.15/819-v6.6-0019-nvmem-imx-correct-nregs-for-i.MX6UL.patch[2]
	generic/backport-5.15/819-v6.6-0020-nvmem-imx-correct-nregs-for-i.MX6ULL.patch[3]

All other patches automatically rebased.

1. https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/?h=v5.15.138&id=6e22bf6f00d593b0a7e0b2f418fde89317424671
2. https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/?h=v5.15.138&id=6efd498009b987a92f57f3bdae476f0503364fb7
3. https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/?h=v5.15.138&id=6e22bf6f00d593b0a7e0b2f418fde89317424671

Build system: x86_64
Build-tested: ramips/tplink_archer-a6-v3
Run-tested: ramips/tplink_archer-a6-v3

Signed-off-by: John Audia <therealgraysky@proton.me>
[Refreshed on top of OpenWrt 23.05]
Signed-off-by: Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@hauke-m.de>
(cherry picked from commit 573c8c3d78)
2023-11-19 14:44:36 +01:00

239 lines
6.7 KiB
Diff

From 06f02ffffc5aa432e119d094f019ba97ccd8bb89 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Maxime Ripard <maxime@cerno.tech>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2022 17:11:44 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] clk: Drop the rate range on clk_put()
When clk_put() is called we don't make another clk_set_rate() call to
re-evaluate the rate boundaries. This is unlike clk_set_rate_range()
that evaluates the rate again each time it is called.
However, clk_put() is essentially equivalent to clk_set_rate_range()
since after clk_put() completes the consumer's boundaries shouldn't be
enforced anymore.
Let's add a call to clk_set_rate_range() in clk_put() to make sure those
rate boundaries are dropped and the clock provider drivers can react. In
order to be as non-intrusive as possible, we'll just make that call if
the clock had non-default boundaries.
Also add a few tests to make sure this case is covered.
Fixes: c80ac50cbb37 ("clk: Always set the rate on clk_set_range_rate")
Tested-by: Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@ew.tq-group.com> # imx8mp
Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> # exynos4210, meson g12b
Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime@cerno.tech>
---
drivers/clk/clk.c | 45 +++++++++++------
drivers/clk/clk_test.c | 108 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 139 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
--- a/drivers/clk/clk.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c
@@ -2330,19 +2330,15 @@ int clk_set_rate_exclusive(struct clk *c
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(clk_set_rate_exclusive);
-/**
- * clk_set_rate_range - set a rate range for a clock source
- * @clk: clock source
- * @min: desired minimum clock rate in Hz, inclusive
- * @max: desired maximum clock rate in Hz, inclusive
- *
- * Returns success (0) or negative errno.
- */
-int clk_set_rate_range(struct clk *clk, unsigned long min, unsigned long max)
+static int clk_set_rate_range_nolock(struct clk *clk,
+ unsigned long min,
+ unsigned long max)
{
int ret = 0;
unsigned long old_min, old_max, rate;
+ lockdep_assert_held(&prepare_lock);
+
if (!clk)
return 0;
@@ -2355,8 +2351,6 @@ int clk_set_rate_range(struct clk *clk,
return -EINVAL;
}
- clk_prepare_lock();
-
if (clk->exclusive_count)
clk_core_rate_unprotect(clk->core);
@@ -2400,6 +2394,28 @@ out:
if (clk->exclusive_count)
clk_core_rate_protect(clk->core);
+ return ret;
+}
+
+/**
+ * clk_set_rate_range - set a rate range for a clock source
+ * @clk: clock source
+ * @min: desired minimum clock rate in Hz, inclusive
+ * @max: desired maximum clock rate in Hz, inclusive
+ *
+ * Return: 0 for success or negative errno on failure.
+ */
+int clk_set_rate_range(struct clk *clk, unsigned long min, unsigned long max)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ if (!clk)
+ return 0;
+
+ clk_prepare_lock();
+
+ ret = clk_set_rate_range_nolock(clk, min, max);
+
clk_prepare_unlock();
return ret;
@@ -4362,9 +4378,10 @@ void __clk_put(struct clk *clk)
}
hlist_del(&clk->clks_node);
- if (clk->min_rate > clk->core->req_rate ||
- clk->max_rate < clk->core->req_rate)
- clk_core_set_rate_nolock(clk->core, clk->core->req_rate);
+
+ /* If we had any boundaries on that clock, let's drop them. */
+ if (clk->min_rate > 0 || clk->max_rate < ULONG_MAX)
+ clk_set_rate_range_nolock(clk, 0, ULONG_MAX);
owner = clk->core->owner;
kref_put(&clk->core->ref, __clk_release);
--- a/drivers/clk/clk_test.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/clk_test.c
@@ -760,9 +760,65 @@ static void clk_range_test_multiple_set_
clk_put(user1);
}
+/*
+ * Test that if we have several subsequent calls to
+ * clk_set_rate_range(), across multiple users, the core will reevaluate
+ * whether a new rate is needed, including when a user drop its clock.
+ *
+ * With clk_dummy_maximize_rate_ops, this means that the rate will
+ * trail along the maximum as it evolves.
+ */
+static void clk_range_test_multiple_set_range_rate_put_maximized(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct clk_dummy_context *ctx = test->priv;
+ struct clk_hw *hw = &ctx->hw;
+ struct clk *clk = hw->clk;
+ struct clk *user1, *user2;
+ unsigned long rate;
+
+ user1 = clk_hw_get_clk(hw, NULL);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, user1);
+
+ user2 = clk_hw_get_clk(hw, NULL);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, user2);
+
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test,
+ clk_set_rate(clk, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2 + 1000),
+ 0);
+
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test,
+ clk_set_rate_range(user1,
+ 0,
+ DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2),
+ 0);
+
+ rate = clk_get_rate(clk);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_GT(test, rate, 0);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, rate, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2);
+
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test,
+ clk_set_rate_range(user2,
+ 0,
+ DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1),
+ 0);
+
+ rate = clk_get_rate(clk);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_GT(test, rate, 0);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, rate, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1);
+
+ clk_put(user2);
+
+ rate = clk_get_rate(clk);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_GT(test, rate, 0);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, rate, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2);
+
+ clk_put(user1);
+}
+
static struct kunit_case clk_range_maximize_test_cases[] = {
KUNIT_CASE(clk_range_test_set_range_rate_maximized),
KUNIT_CASE(clk_range_test_multiple_set_range_rate_maximized),
+ KUNIT_CASE(clk_range_test_multiple_set_range_rate_put_maximized),
{}
};
@@ -877,9 +933,61 @@ static void clk_range_test_multiple_set_
clk_put(user1);
}
+/*
+ * Test that if we have several subsequent calls to
+ * clk_set_rate_range(), across multiple users, the core will reevaluate
+ * whether a new rate is needed, including when a user drop its clock.
+ *
+ * With clk_dummy_minimize_rate_ops, this means that the rate will
+ * trail along the minimum as it evolves.
+ */
+static void clk_range_test_multiple_set_range_rate_put_minimized(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct clk_dummy_context *ctx = test->priv;
+ struct clk_hw *hw = &ctx->hw;
+ struct clk *clk = hw->clk;
+ struct clk *user1, *user2;
+ unsigned long rate;
+
+ user1 = clk_hw_get_clk(hw, NULL);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, user1);
+
+ user2 = clk_hw_get_clk(hw, NULL);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, user2);
+
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test,
+ clk_set_rate_range(user1,
+ DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1,
+ ULONG_MAX),
+ 0);
+
+ rate = clk_get_rate(clk);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_GT(test, rate, 0);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, rate, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1);
+
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test,
+ clk_set_rate_range(user2,
+ DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2,
+ ULONG_MAX),
+ 0);
+
+ rate = clk_get_rate(clk);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_GT(test, rate, 0);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, rate, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2);
+
+ clk_put(user2);
+
+ rate = clk_get_rate(clk);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_GT(test, rate, 0);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, rate, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1);
+
+ clk_put(user1);
+}
+
static struct kunit_case clk_range_minimize_test_cases[] = {
KUNIT_CASE(clk_range_test_set_range_rate_minimized),
KUNIT_CASE(clk_range_test_multiple_set_range_rate_minimized),
+ KUNIT_CASE(clk_range_test_multiple_set_range_rate_put_minimized),
{}
};