Hello,
(Not sure why this e-mail comes with me as the From:, but anyway.)
On Wed, 23 Jul 2014 16:53:58 -0700, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> +static int clk_cpu_set_rate(struct clk_hw *hwclk, unsigned long rate,
> + unsigned long parent_rate)
> +{
> + if (__clk_is_enabled(hwclk->clk))
> + return clk_cpu_on_set_rate(hwclk, rate, parent_rate);
> + else
> + return clk_cpu_off_set_rate(hwclk, rate, parent_rate);
>
> This is racy. You don't hold the clk_enable lock so it could be enable
> between the conditional check and executing clk_cpu_on_set_rate.
Right.
> How do you ensure that secondary CPU clocks are not enabled/disabled
> when changing rates?
In practice, this currently cannot happen: we enable the secondary CPU
clocks before starting the secondary CPUs, and we never ever disable or
re-enable again those clocks. So with the present code, I believe there
is no problem. Even when we do CPU hotplug, we don't turn off the CPU
clocks, simply because they cannot be turned off: the enable/disable
state is only used here as an indication so that the clock driver knows
which frequency change strategy it should apply.
But you're anyway right, I'll send a followup patch adding the lock.
Would that be OK for you?
Thanks,
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
