Re: [PATCH] phy: rockchip-inno-usb2: correct 480MHz output clock stable time

From: wlf
Date: Wed Nov 09 2016 - 21:55:04 EST


Hi Doug,

å 2016å11æ10æ 04:54, Doug Anderson åé:
Hi,

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 5:00 AM, William Wu <wulf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
We found that the system crashed due to 480MHz output clock of
USB2 PHY was unstable after clock had been enabled by gpu module.

Theoretically, 1 millisecond is a critical value for 480MHz
output clock stable time, so we try to change the delay time
to 1.2 millisecond to avoid this issue.

Signed-off-by: William Wu <wulf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-inno-usb2.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-inno-usb2.c b/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-inno-usb2.c
index ecfd7d1..8f2d2b6 100644
--- a/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-inno-usb2.c
+++ b/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-inno-usb2.c
@@ -267,7 +267,7 @@ static int rockchip_usb2phy_clk480m_enable(struct clk_hw *hw)
return ret;

/* waitting for the clk become stable */
- mdelay(1);
+ udelay(1200);
Several people who have seen this patch have expressed concern that a
1.2 ms delay is pretty long for something that's supposed to be
"atomic" like a clk_enable(). Consider that someone might call
clk_enable() while interrupts are disabled and that a 1.2 ms interrupt
latency is not so great.

It seems like this clock should be moved to be enabled in "prepare"
and the "enable" should be a no-op. This is a functionality change,
but I don't think there are any real users for this clock at the
moment so it should be fine.

(of course, the 1 ms latency that existed before this patch was still
pretty bad, but ...)
Thanks a lot for your suggestion.
I agree with you. clk_enable() will call spin_lock_irqsave() to disable interrupt, and we add
more than 1ms in clk_enable may cause big latency.

And according to clk_prepare() description:
In a simple case, clk_prepare can be used instead of clk_enable to ungate a clk if the
operation may sleep. One example is a clk which is accessed over I2c.

So maybe we can remove the clock to clk_prepare.

Hi Heiko, Frank,
What do you think of it?

Best regards,
wulf

-Doug