Message ID | 1545039990-19984-9-git-send-email-jorge.ramirez-ortiz@linaro.org |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | Support CPU frequency scaling on QCS404 | expand |
On Mon 17 Dec 01:46 PST 2018, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote: > When COMMON_CLK_DISABLED_UNUSED is set, in an effort to save power and > to keep the software model of the clock in line with reality, the > framework transverses the clock tree and disables those clocks that > were enabled by the firmware but have not been enabled by any device > driver. > > If CPUFREQ is enabled, early during the system boot, it might attempt > to change the CPU frequency ("set_rate"). If the HFPLL is selected as > a provider, it will then change the rate for this clock. > > As boot continues, clk_disable_unused_subtree will run. Since it wont > find a valid counter (enable_count) for a clock that is actually > enabled it will attempt to disable it which will cause the CPU to > stop. Notice that in this driver, calls to check whether the clock is > enabled are routed via the is_enabled callback which queries the > hardware. > With the CPUFREQ referencing the CPU clock driver, that has decided to run off this clock, why is it not refcounted? Regards, Bjorn > The following commit, rather than marking the clock critical and > forcing the clock to be always enabled, addresses the above scenario > making sure the clock is not disabled but it continues to rely on the > firmware to enable the clock. > > Co-developed-by: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@linaro.org> > Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@linaro.org> > Signed-off-by: Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz <jorge.ramirez-ortiz@linaro.org> > --- > drivers/clk/qcom/hfpll.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/hfpll.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/hfpll.c > index 0ffed0d..9d92f5d 100644 > --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/hfpll.c > +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/hfpll.c > @@ -58,6 +58,7 @@ static int qcom_hfpll_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > .parent_names = (const char *[]){ "xo" }, > .num_parents = 1, > .ops = &clk_ops_hfpll, > + .flags = CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED, > }; > > h = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*h), GFP_KERNEL); > -- > 2.7.4 >
On 1/17/19 07:33, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Mon 17 Dec 01:46 PST 2018, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote: > >> When COMMON_CLK_DISABLED_UNUSED is set, in an effort to save power and >> to keep the software model of the clock in line with reality, the >> framework transverses the clock tree and disables those clocks that >> were enabled by the firmware but have not been enabled by any device >> driver. >> >> If CPUFREQ is enabled, early during the system boot, it might attempt >> to change the CPU frequency ("set_rate"). If the HFPLL is selected as >> a provider, it will then change the rate for this clock. >> >> As boot continues, clk_disable_unused_subtree will run. Since it wont >> find a valid counter (enable_count) for a clock that is actually >> enabled it will attempt to disable it which will cause the CPU to >> stop. Notice that in this driver, calls to check whether the clock is >> enabled are routed via the is_enabled callback which queries the >> hardware. >> > > With the CPUFREQ referencing the CPU clock driver, that has decided to > run off this clock, why is it not refcounted? COMMON_CLK_DISABLED_UNUSED relies on the enable_count reference counter to disable the clocks that were enabled by the firwmare and not by the drivers. the cpufreq driver does not enable the cpu clock. so when clk_change_rate is called, the enable_count counter is not incremented and therefore it just remains null since this was enabled by the firmware. I tried doing: diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c index e58bfcb..5a9f83e 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c @@ -124,6 +124,10 @@ static int resources_available(void) return ret; } + ret = clk_prepare_enable(cpu_clk); + if (ret) + return ret; + clk_put(cpu_clk); name = find_supply_name(cpu_dev); and that removed the need for CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED. But I am not sure of the system wide consequences of that change to cpufreq. maybe Viresh can comment? > > Regards, > Bjorn > >> The following commit, rather than marking the clock critical and >> forcing the clock to be always enabled, addresses the above scenario >> making sure the clock is not disabled but it continues to rely on the >> firmware to enable the clock. >> >> Co-developed-by: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@linaro.org> >> Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@linaro.org> >> Signed-off-by: Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz <jorge.ramirez-ortiz@linaro.org> >> --- >> drivers/clk/qcom/hfpll.c | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/hfpll.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/hfpll.c >> index 0ffed0d..9d92f5d 100644 >> --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/hfpll.c >> +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/hfpll.c >> @@ -58,6 +58,7 @@ static int qcom_hfpll_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> .parent_names = (const char *[]){ "xo" }, >> .num_parents = 1, >> .ops = &clk_ops_hfpll, >> + .flags = CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED, >> }; >> >> h = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*h), GFP_KERNEL); >> -- >> 2.7.4 >> >
On 1/17/19 11:08, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 17-01-19, 09:38, Jorge Ramirez wrote: >> COMMON_CLK_DISABLED_UNUSED relies on the enable_count reference counter >> to disable the clocks that were enabled by the firwmare and not by the >> drivers. >> >> the cpufreq driver does not enable the cpu clock. >> >> so when clk_change_rate is called, the enable_count counter is not >> incremented and therefore it just remains null since this was enabled by >> the firmware. >> >> I tried doing: >> >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c >> index e58bfcb..5a9f83e 100644 >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c >> @@ -124,6 +124,10 @@ static int resources_available(void) >> return ret; >> } >> >> + ret = clk_prepare_enable(cpu_clk); >> + if (ret) >> + return ret; >> + >> clk_put(cpu_clk); >> >> name = find_supply_name(cpu_dev); >> >> >> and that removed the need for CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED. But I am not sure of >> the system wide consequences of that change to cpufreq. > > If the cpufreq driver enables it then it should disable it on exit as > well, right ? And in that case if you unload your driver's module, you > will hang the system as the clock will get disabled :) ah, of course, sorry was over-thinking this thing :) > > Every other platform must either be marking it with CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED > or they must be doing clk_enable from somewhere, maybe the CPU online > path, not sure though. > since this clock is enabled by the firmware, it seems to me that using CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED remains the best option.
On 1/22/19 19:47, Stephen Boyd wrote: > Quoting Jorge Ramirez (2019-01-17 02:46:21) >> On 1/17/19 11:08, Viresh Kumar wrote: >>> On 17-01-19, 09:38, Jorge Ramirez wrote: >>>> COMMON_CLK_DISABLED_UNUSED relies on the enable_count reference counter >>>> to disable the clocks that were enabled by the firwmare and not by the >>>> drivers. >>>> >>>> the cpufreq driver does not enable the cpu clock. >>>> >>>> so when clk_change_rate is called, the enable_count counter is not >>>> incremented and therefore it just remains null since this was enabled by >>>> the firmware. >>>> >>>> I tried doing: >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c >>>> index e58bfcb..5a9f83e 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c >>>> @@ -124,6 +124,10 @@ static int resources_available(void) >>>> return ret; >>>> } >>>> >>>> + ret = clk_prepare_enable(cpu_clk); >>>> + if (ret) >>>> + return ret; >>>> + >>>> clk_put(cpu_clk); >>>> >>>> name = find_supply_name(cpu_dev); >>>> >>>> >>>> and that removed the need for CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED. But I am not sure of >>>> the system wide consequences of that change to cpufreq. >>> >>> If the cpufreq driver enables it then it should disable it on exit as >>> well, right ? And in that case if you unload your driver's module, you >>> will hang the system as the clock will get disabled :) >> >> ah, of course, sorry was over-thinking this thing :) >> >>> >>> Every other platform must either be marking it with CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED >>> or they must be doing clk_enable from somewhere, maybe the CPU online >>> path, not sure though. >>> >> >> since this clock is enabled by the firmware, it seems to me that using >> CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED remains the best option. >> > > What do you do about CPUs being offlined? Presumably when the CPU is > gone the system doesn't need to keep the clk enabled anymore. > > the kernel does not take any action - it is under firmware control; and since the clock is shared between all cores I there will have to be some involvement not only at TF-A/firmware level but also at the TrustedOS level for when the last core is offlined. I dont have visibility on either of those projects though.
diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/hfpll.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/hfpll.c index 0ffed0d..9d92f5d 100644 --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/hfpll.c +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/hfpll.c @@ -58,6 +58,7 @@ static int qcom_hfpll_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) .parent_names = (const char *[]){ "xo" }, .num_parents = 1, .ops = &clk_ops_hfpll, + .flags = CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED, }; h = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*h), GFP_KERNEL);