[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140515074724.GJ16662@pengutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 09:47:24 +0200
From: Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Soren Brinkmann <soren.brinkmann@...inx.com>
Cc: Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
cpufreq@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Frequency resolution in CCF vs. cpufreq
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 03:30:50PM -0700, Soren Brinkmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have one or two problems with cpufreq and the CCF, which are caused by
> rounding/different frequency resolutions.
>
> cpufreq works with kHz, while the CCF uses Hz. On Zynq our default frequency is
> 666666666 Hz which the CCF, due to rounding, reports as 666666660. And for
Why does this happen? Isn't that a bug? What is the actual freqency?
666666666 Hz or 2000000000/3 Hz?
> cpufreq, which simply divides values it obtains through clk_round_rate() by
> 1000, 666666.
> Since passing 666666 to clk_round_rate() does not result in 666666660
> (clk_round_rate() always rounds down!), we chose to put 666667 in the OPP. This
What is OPP?
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists