From: mturquette@baylibre.com (Michael Turquette)
To: linus-amlogic@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC 3/7] clk: rework calls to round and determine rate callbacks
Date: Thu, 11 May 2017 11:23:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <149452702971.89307.6771018471044024269@resonance> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170321183330.26722-4-jbrunet@baylibre.com>
Quoting Jerome Brunet (2017-03-21 11:33:26)
> Rework the way the callbacks round_rate and determine_rate are called. The
> goal is to do this at a single point and make it easier to add conditions
> before calling them.
>
> This rework is done to ease the integration of "protected" clock
> functionality.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com>
This was a bit ugly to read in unified format, but looks OKish to me.
This code can be fragile so some testing would be good.
Regards,
Mike
> ---
> drivers/clk/clk.c | 78 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
> 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c
> index 57982a06dbce..fa77a1841e0f 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c
> @@ -833,16 +833,34 @@ static int clk_disable_unused(void)
> }
> late_initcall_sync(clk_disable_unused);
>
> -static int clk_core_round_rate_nolock(struct clk_core *core,
> - struct clk_rate_request *req)
> +static int clk_core_determine_round(struct clk_core *core,
> + struct clk_rate_request *req)
> {
> - struct clk_core *parent;
> long rate;
>
> - lockdep_assert_held(&prepare_lock);
> + if (core->ops->determine_rate) {
> + return core->ops->determine_rate(core->hw, req);
> + } else if (core->ops->round_rate) {
> + rate = core->ops->round_rate(core->hw, req->rate,
> + &req->best_parent_rate);
> + if (rate < 0)
> + return rate;
>
> - if (!core)
> - return 0;
> + req->rate = rate;
> + } else {
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void clk_core_init_rate_req(struct clk_core *core,
> + struct clk_rate_request *req)
> +{
> + struct clk_core *parent;
> +
> + if (WARN_ON(!core || !req))
> + return;
>
> parent = core->parent;
> if (parent) {
> @@ -852,22 +870,24 @@ static int clk_core_round_rate_nolock(struct clk_core *core,
> req->best_parent_hw = NULL;
> req->best_parent_rate = 0;
> }
> +}
>
> - if (core->ops->determine_rate) {
> - return core->ops->determine_rate(core->hw, req);
> - } else if (core->ops->round_rate) {
> - rate = core->ops->round_rate(core->hw, req->rate,
> - &req->best_parent_rate);
> - if (rate < 0)
> - return rate;
> +static int clk_core_round_rate_nolock(struct clk_core *core,
> + struct clk_rate_request *req)
> +{
> + lockdep_assert_held(&prepare_lock);
>
> - req->rate = rate;
> - } else if (core->flags & CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT) {
> - return clk_core_round_rate_nolock(parent, req);
> - } else {
> - req->rate = core->rate;
> - }
> + if (!core)
> + return 0;
> +
> + clk_core_init_rate_req(core, req);
> +
> + if (core->ops->determine_rate || core->ops->round_rate)
> + return clk_core_determine_round(core, req);
> + else if (core->flags & CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT)
> + return clk_core_round_rate_nolock(core->parent, req);
>
> + req->rate = core->rate;
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -1354,36 +1374,26 @@ static struct clk_core *clk_calc_new_rates(struct clk_core *core,
> clk_core_get_boundaries(core, &min_rate, &max_rate);
>
> /* find the closest rate and parent clk/rate */
> - if (core->ops->determine_rate) {
> + if (core->ops->determine_rate || core->ops->round_rate) {
> struct clk_rate_request req;
>
> req.rate = rate;
> req.min_rate = min_rate;
> req.max_rate = max_rate;
> - if (parent) {
> - req.best_parent_hw = parent->hw;
> - req.best_parent_rate = parent->rate;
> - } else {
> - req.best_parent_hw = NULL;
> - req.best_parent_rate = 0;
> - }
>
> - ret = core->ops->determine_rate(core->hw, &req);
> + clk_core_init_rate_req(core, req);
> +
> + ret = clk_core_determine_round(core, &req);
> if (ret < 0)
> return NULL;
>
> best_parent_rate = req.best_parent_rate;
> new_rate = req.rate;
> parent = req.best_parent_hw ? req.best_parent_hw->core : NULL;
> - } else if (core->ops->round_rate) {
> - ret = core->ops->round_rate(core->hw, rate,
> - &best_parent_rate);
> - if (ret < 0)
> - return NULL;
>
> - new_rate = ret;
> if (new_rate < min_rate || new_rate > max_rate)
> return NULL;
> +
> } else if (!parent || !(core->flags & CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT)) {
> /* pass-through clock without adjustable parent */
> core->new_rate = core->rate;
> --
> 2.9.3
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-11 18:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-21 18:33 [RFC 0/7] clk: implement clock locking mechanism Jerome Brunet
2017-03-21 18:33 ` [RFC 1/7] clk: take the prepare lock out of clk_core_set_parent Jerome Brunet
2017-05-11 18:23 ` Michael Turquette
2017-05-12 9:54 ` Jerome Brunet
2017-03-21 18:33 ` [RFC 2/7] clk: add set_phase core function Jerome Brunet
2017-05-11 18:24 ` Michael Turquette
2017-03-21 18:33 ` [RFC 3/7] clk: rework calls to round and determine rate callbacks Jerome Brunet
2017-05-11 18:23 ` Michael Turquette [this message]
2017-03-21 18:33 ` [RFC 4/7] clk: add support for clock protection Jerome Brunet
2017-05-11 19:05 ` Michael Turquette
2017-05-12 13:08 ` Jerome Brunet
2017-05-15 20:03 ` Michael Turquette
2017-05-11 19:07 ` Michael Turquette
2017-03-21 18:33 ` [RFC 5/7] clk: rollback set_rate_range changes on failure Jerome Brunet
2017-03-21 18:33 ` [RFC 6/7] clk: cosmetic changes to clk_summary debugfs entry Jerome Brunet
2017-03-21 18:33 ` [RFC 7/7] clk: fix incorrect usage of ENOSYS Jerome Brunet
2017-03-22 0:07 ` [RFC 0/7] clk: implement clock locking mechanism Michael Turquette
2017-03-22 18:13 ` Jerome Brunet
2017-05-11 18:23 ` Michael Turquette
2017-05-12 14:04 ` Jerome Brunet
2017-05-15 20:09 ` Michael Turquette
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=149452702971.89307.6771018471044024269@resonance \
--to=mturquette@baylibre.com \
--cc=linus-amlogic@lists.infradead.org \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®