linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clk: tegra: fix vi

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <53AB38D6.6070901@wwwdotorg.org>
Date:	Wed, 25 Jun 2014 15:02:14 -0600
From:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To:	Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@...dia.com>
CC:	Prashant Gaikwad <pgaikwad@...dia.com>,
	Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
	linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: tegra: fix vi_sensor clocks on Tegra124

On 06/25/2014 10:10 AM, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
> vi_sensor and vi_sensor2 have a wrong hw clkid on Tegra124. Fix this by
> correcting the hw clkid for Tegra124 and creating the Tegra114 vi_sensor clock
> from its own data. Tegra124 was also using the wrong internal clock id.

> diff --git a/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c b/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c

> -	MUX("vi_sensor2", mux_pllm_pllc2_c_c3_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI_SENSOR2, 20, TEGRA_PERIPH_NO_RESET, tegra_clk_vi_sensor2),
> +	MUX("vi_sensor2", mux_pllm_pllc2_c_c3_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI_SENSOR2, 165, TEGRA_PERIPH_NO_RESET, tegra_clk_vi_sensor2),
...
> -	MUX8("vi_sensor", mux_pllm_pllc2_c_c3_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI_SENSOR, 20, TEGRA_PERIPH_NO_RESET, tegra_clk_vi_sensor_8),
> +	MUX8("vi_sensor", mux_pllm_pllc2_c_c3_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI_SENSOR, 164, TEGRA_PERIPH_NO_RESET, tegra_clk_vi_sensor_8),

If I'm reading the TRM right, these are CAM_MCLK/CAM_MCLK2 in the
RST_DEV_X register. Is the TRM simply inconsistent in the naming of
these clocks, or is there some other inconsistency?

> diff --git a/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra114.c b/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra114.c

> @@ -777,7 +784,6 @@ static struct tegra_clk tegra114_clks[tegra_clk_max] __initdata = {
>  	[tegra_clk_spdif_in] = { .dt_id = TEGRA114_CLK_SPDIF_IN, .present = true },
>  	[tegra_clk_spdif_out] = { .dt_id = TEGRA114_CLK_SPDIF_OUT, .present = true },
>  	[tegra_clk_vi_8] = { .dt_id = TEGRA114_CLK_VI, .present = true },
> -	[tegra_clk_vi_sensor_8] = { .dt_id = TEGRA114_CLK_VI_SENSOR, .present = true },

Does it make any sense to
s/tegra_clk_vi_sensor_8/tegra_clk_vi_sensor_114/ and put the definition
into the table in clk-tegra-periph.c instead? I suppose if this clock
definition is specific to Tegra114 there's not much point, so this is
probably fine. Hopefully the new tegra_clk_vi_sensor_8 lasts longer than
just Tegra124...

So overall, I think:
Acked-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>
--
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/