1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
|
From 96da86bde649d53c634b35be715c1e499e39ccf7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Maxime Ripard <maxime@cerno.tech>
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2022 14:45:17 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] clk: tests: Add some tests for clk_get_rate_range()
Let's introduce a bunch of unit tests to make sure the values returned
by clk_get_rate_range() are sane.
Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime@cerno.tech>
---
drivers/clk/clk_test.c | 182 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 182 insertions(+)
--- a/drivers/clk/clk_test.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/clk_test.c
@@ -923,6 +923,109 @@ clk_test_single_parent_mux_get_parent(st
}
/*
+ * Test that for a clock with a single parent and CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
+ * if we set a range on both the child clock and its parent, with a
+ * smaller range on the child, the rate range returned by
+ * clk_get_rate_range() is aggregate of both ranges.
+ */
+static void
+clk_test_single_parent_mux_get_range_both_child_smaller(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct clk_single_parent_ctx *ctx = test->priv;
+ struct clk_hw *hw = &ctx->hw;
+ struct clk *clk = hw->clk;
+ struct clk *parent;
+ unsigned long min, max;
+ int ret;
+
+ parent = clk_get_parent(clk);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_PTR_NE(test, parent, NULL);
+
+ ret = clk_set_rate_range(parent, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, ret, 0);
+
+ ret = clk_set_rate_range(clk,
+ DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1 + 1000,
+ DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2 - 1000);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, ret, 0);
+
+ clk_get_rate_range(clk, &min, &max);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, min, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1 + 1000);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, max, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2 - 1000);
+}
+
+/*
+ * Test that for a clock with a single parent and CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
+ * if we set a range on both the child clock and its parent, with a
+ * smaller range on the parent, the rate range returned by
+ * clk_get_rate_range() is aggregate of both ranges.
+ *
+ * FIXME: clk_get_rate_range() (and clk_core_get_boundaries() in
+ * particular) doesn't take the parent range into account when the clock
+ * has CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT.
+ */
+static void
+clk_test_single_parent_mux_get_range_both_parent_smaller(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct clk_single_parent_ctx *ctx = test->priv;
+ struct clk_hw *hw = &ctx->hw;
+ struct clk *clk = hw->clk;
+ struct clk *parent;
+ unsigned long min, max;
+ int ret;
+
+ kunit_skip(test, "This needs to be fixed in the core.");
+
+ parent = clk_get_parent(clk);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_PTR_NE(test, parent, NULL);
+
+ ret = clk_set_rate_range(parent,
+ DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1 + 1000,
+ DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2 - 1000);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, ret, 0);
+
+ ret = clk_set_rate_range(clk, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, ret, 0);
+
+ clk_get_rate_range(clk, &min, &max);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, min, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1 + 1000);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, min, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2 - 1000);
+}
+
+/*
+ * Test that for a clock with a single parent and CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
+ * if we set a range on the parent clock only, the rate range returned
+ * by clk_get_rate_range() on the children clock matches the parent
+ * range.
+ *
+ * FIXME: clk_get_rate_range() (and clk_core_get_boundaries() in
+ * particular) doesn't take the parent range into account when the clock
+ * has CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT.
+ */
+static void
+clk_test_single_parent_mux_get_range_parent_only(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct clk_single_parent_ctx *ctx = test->priv;
+ struct clk_hw *hw = &ctx->hw;
+ struct clk *clk = hw->clk;
+ struct clk *parent;
+ unsigned long min, max;
+ int ret;
+
+ kunit_skip(test, "This needs to be fixed in the core.");
+
+ parent = clk_get_parent(clk);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_PTR_NE(test, parent, NULL);
+
+ ret = clk_set_rate_range(parent, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, ret, 0);
+
+ clk_get_rate_range(clk, &min, &max);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, min, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, min, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2);
+}
+
+/*
* Test that for a clock with a single parent, clk_has_parent() actually
* reports it as a parent.
*/
@@ -1099,6 +1202,9 @@ clk_test_single_parent_mux_set_range_rou
static struct kunit_case clk_single_parent_mux_test_cases[] = {
KUNIT_CASE(clk_test_single_parent_mux_get_parent),
+ KUNIT_CASE(clk_test_single_parent_mux_get_range_both_child_smaller),
+ KUNIT_CASE(clk_test_single_parent_mux_get_range_both_parent_smaller),
+ KUNIT_CASE(clk_test_single_parent_mux_get_range_parent_only),
KUNIT_CASE(clk_test_single_parent_mux_has_parent),
KUNIT_CASE(clk_test_single_parent_mux_set_range_disjoint_child_last),
KUNIT_CASE(clk_test_single_parent_mux_set_range_disjoint_parent_last),
@@ -1334,6 +1440,79 @@ clk_orphan_two_level_root_last_test_suit
};
/*
+ * Test that clk_set_rate_range() and clk_get_rate_range() are
+ * consistent on a simple clock without any parent.
+ */
+static void clk_range_test_get_range(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct clk_dummy_context *ctx = test->priv;
+ struct clk_hw *hw = &ctx->hw;
+ struct clk *clk = hw->clk;
+ unsigned long min, max;
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = clk_set_rate_range(clk, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, ret, 0);
+
+ clk_get_rate_range(clk, &min, &max);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, min, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, max, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2);
+}
+
+/*
+ * Test that, on a simple clock without any parent, if a rate range is
+ * set on a clk, it's properly reported by clk_get_rate_range() on all
+ * the clk structure of that clock.
+ */
+static void clk_range_test_get_range_multiple_clk(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct clk_dummy_context *ctx = test->priv;
+ struct clk_hw *hw = &ctx->hw;
+ struct clk *user1, *user2;
+ unsigned long min, max;
+ int ret;
+
+ user1 = clk_hw_get_clk(hw, NULL);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, user1);
+
+ user2 = clk_hw_get_clk(hw, NULL);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, user2);
+
+ ret = clk_set_rate_range(user1,
+ DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1,
+ DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, ret, 0);
+
+ clk_get_rate_range(user2, &min, &max);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, min, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, max, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2);
+}
+
+/*
+ * Test that, on a simple clock without any parent, if a rate range is
+ * set on struct clk_hw, it's properly reported by clk_get_rate_range().
+ */
+static void clk_range_test_get_range_with_hw(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct clk_dummy_context *ctx = test->priv;
+ struct clk_hw *hw = &ctx->hw;
+ struct clk *clk = hw->clk;
+ unsigned long min, max;
+ int ret;
+
+ clk_hw_set_rate_range(hw, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2);
+
+ ret = clk_set_rate_range(clk,
+ DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1 + 1000,
+ DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2 - 1000);
+ KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, ret, 0);
+
+ clk_get_rate_range(clk, &min, &max);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, min, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1 + 1000);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, max, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2 - 1000);
+}
+
+/*
* Test that clk_set_rate_range won't return an error for a valid range
* and that it will make sure the rate of the clock is within the
* boundaries.
@@ -1621,6 +1800,9 @@ static void clk_range_test_set_range_get
}
static struct kunit_case clk_range_test_cases[] = {
+ KUNIT_CASE(clk_range_test_get_range),
+ KUNIT_CASE(clk_range_test_get_range_with_hw),
+ KUNIT_CASE(clk_range_test_get_range_multiple_clk),
KUNIT_CASE(clk_range_test_set_range),
KUNIT_CASE(clk_range_test_set_range_invalid),
KUNIT_CASE(clk_range_test_multiple_disjoints_range),
|
