Message ID | 20220429120108.9396-4-ansuelsmth@gmail.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | Small fixes/improvement for hfpll and krait | expand |
On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 05:53:32PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On 29/04/2022 15:01, Ansuel Smith wrote: > > Check if hw_parent is present before calculating the round_rate to > > prevent kernel panic. On error -EINVAL is reported. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ansuel Smith <ansuelsmth@gmail.com> > > I see that other clock drivers do not perform this check. Which path leads > to this oops? > This comes from qsdk patches so I apologize in advance about this. Anyway I'm checking the code and krait-cc is the only user of krait_div2_clk_ops. That user have as parent only hfpll_something that is declared by gcc. Now hfpll can also be declared in dts with a dedicated driver so I wonder if the problem is there in the case when hfpll is declared in dts and is probed after krait-cc. This is not the case for ipq8064 but I wonder if qsdk have other krait based device that have a configuration with hfpll declared in dts. In short you are right and in our current code the check is uselss and I'm positive about dropping this patch but I do wonder if downstream there is an actual use of this. Don't know how to proceed. Any hint? > > --- > > drivers/clk/qcom/clk-krait.c | 7 ++++++- > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-krait.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-krait.c > > index 90046428693c..6c367ad6506a 100644 > > --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-krait.c > > +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-krait.c > > @@ -84,7 +84,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(krait_mux_clk_ops); > > static long krait_div2_round_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long rate, > > unsigned long *parent_rate) > > { > > - *parent_rate = clk_hw_round_rate(clk_hw_get_parent(hw), rate * 2); > > + struct clk_hw *hw_parent = clk_hw_get_parent(hw); > > + > > + if (!hw_parent) > > + return -EINVAL; > > + > > + *parent_rate = clk_hw_round_rate(hw_parent, rate * 2); > > return DIV_ROUND_UP(*parent_rate, 2); > > } > > > -- > With best wishes > Dmitry
On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 at 18:08, Ansuel Smith <ansuelsmth@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 05:53:32PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > On 29/04/2022 15:01, Ansuel Smith wrote: > > > Check if hw_parent is present before calculating the round_rate to > > > prevent kernel panic. On error -EINVAL is reported. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ansuel Smith <ansuelsmth@gmail.com> > > > > I see that other clock drivers do not perform this check. Which path leads > > to this oops? > > > > This comes from qsdk patches so I apologize in advance about this. Ugh. If it comes from the code authored by somebody else, it'd be better to note this (by using the From or Co-developed-by tags). At the very least (if the author is unknown) you can mention the origin of the patch (qsdk) in the commit message. > > Anyway I'm checking the code and krait-cc is the only user of > krait_div2_clk_ops. That user have as parent only hfpll_something that > is declared by gcc. Now hfpll can also be declared in dts with a > dedicated driver so I wonder if the problem is there in the case when > hfpll is declared in dts and is probed after krait-cc. This is not the > case for ipq8064 but I wonder if qsdk have other krait based device that > have a configuration with hfpll declared in dts. On msm8974 (and maybe others) the hfpll should be driven by the separate hfpll driver. > > In short you are right and in our current code the check is uselss and > I'm positive about dropping this patch but I do wonder if downstream > there is an actual use of this. Don't know how to proceed. Any hint? I'd say, let's drop it for now unless Stephen or Bjorn tell us that it's a valid check. > > > > --- > > > drivers/clk/qcom/clk-krait.c | 7 ++++++- > > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-krait.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-krait.c > > > index 90046428693c..6c367ad6506a 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-krait.c > > > +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-krait.c > > > @@ -84,7 +84,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(krait_mux_clk_ops); > > > static long krait_div2_round_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long rate, > > > unsigned long *parent_rate) > > > { > > > - *parent_rate = clk_hw_round_rate(clk_hw_get_parent(hw), rate * 2); > > > + struct clk_hw *hw_parent = clk_hw_get_parent(hw); > > > + > > > + if (!hw_parent) > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > + > > > + *parent_rate = clk_hw_round_rate(hw_parent, rate * 2); > > > return DIV_ROUND_UP(*parent_rate, 2); > > > } > > > > > > -- > > With best wishes > > Dmitry > > -- > Ansuel
diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-krait.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-krait.c index 90046428693c..6c367ad6506a 100644 --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-krait.c +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-krait.c @@ -84,7 +84,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(krait_mux_clk_ops); static long krait_div2_round_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long rate, unsigned long *parent_rate) { - *parent_rate = clk_hw_round_rate(clk_hw_get_parent(hw), rate * 2); + struct clk_hw *hw_parent = clk_hw_get_parent(hw); + + if (!hw_parent) + return -EINVAL; + + *parent_rate = clk_hw_round_rate(hw_parent, rate * 2); return DIV_ROUND_UP(*parent_rate, 2); }
Check if hw_parent is present before calculating the round_rate to prevent kernel panic. On error -EINVAL is reported. Signed-off-by: Ansuel Smith <ansuelsmth@gmail.com> --- drivers/clk/qcom/clk-krait.c | 7 ++++++- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)