Re: Locking in the clk API, part 2: clk_prepare/clk_unprepare
From: <hidden>
Date: 2011-02-01 10:55:31
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, lkml
Hello Jeremy, On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 05:11:29PM +0800, Jeremy Kerr wrote:
quoted
I suggested that clk_prepare() be callable only from non-atomic contexts, and do whatever's required to ensure that the clock is available. That may end up enabling the clock as a result.I think that clk_prepare/clk_unprepare looks like the most promising solution, so will try to get some preliminary patches done. Here's what I'm planning: ----- The changes to the API are essentially: 1) Document clk_enable/clk_disable as callable from atomic contexts, and so clock implementations must not sleep within this function. 2) For clock implementations that may sleep to turn on a clock, we add a new pair of functions to the clock API: clk_prepare and clk_unprepare. These will provide hooks for the clock implmentation to do any sleepable work (eg, wait for PLLs to settle) in preparation for a later clk_enable. For the most common clock implemntation cases (where clocks can be enabled atomically), these functions will be a no-op, and all of the enable/disable work can be done in clk_enable/clk_disable. For implementations where clocks require blocking on enable/disable, most of the work will be done in clk_prepare/clk_unprepare. The clk_enable and clk_disable functions may be no-ops. For drivers, this means that clk_prepare must be called (and have returned) before calling clk_enable. = Enable/Prepare counts = I intend to do the enable and prepare "counting" in the core clock API, meaning that that the clk_ops callbacks will only invoked on the first prepare/enable and the last unprepare/disable. = Concurrency = Splitting the prepare and enable stages introduces the concurrency requirements: 1) clk_enable must not return before the clock is outputting a valid clock signal. 2) clk_prepare must not return before the clock is fully prepared (ie, it is safe to call clk_enable). It is not possible for clk_enable to wait for the clock to be prepared, because that would require synchronisation with clk_prepare, which may then require blocking. Therefore: 3) The clock consumer *must* respect the proper ordering of clk_prepare and clk_enable. For example, drivers that call clk_enable during an interrupt must ensure that the interrupt handler will not be invoked until clk_prepare has returned. = Other considerations = The time that a clock spends "prepared" is a superset of the the time that a clock spends "enabled". Therefore, clocks that are switched on during clk_prepare (ie, non-atomic clocks) will be running for a larger amount of time. In some cases, this can be mitigated by moving some of the final (atomic) switching functionality to the clk_enable function. = Implementation = Basically: struct clk { const struct clk_ops *ops int enable_count; spinlock_t enable_lock; int prepare_count; struct mutex prepare_lock; }; int clk_enable(struct clk *clk) { int ret = 0; spin_lock(&clk->enable_lock); if (!clk->enable_count) ret = clk->ops->enable(clk); if (!ret) clk->enable_count++; spin_unlock(&clk->enable_lock); return ret; } int clk_prepare(struct clk *clk) { int ret = 0; mutex_lock(&clk->prepare_lock); if (!clk->prepare_count) ret = clk->ops->prepare(clk); if (!ret) clk->prepare_count++; mutex_unlock(&clk->prepare_lock); return ret; } ----- Comments welcome, code coming soon.
Do you plan to handle the case that clk_enable is called while prepare isn't completed (considering the special case "not called at all")? Maybe BUG_ON(clk->ops->prepare && !clk->prepare_count)? Alternatively don't force the sleep in clk_prepare (e.g. by protecting prepare_count by a spinlock (probably enable_lock)) and call clk_prepare before calling clk->ops->enable? Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |