[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d8171267-dc49-e573-ca69-c2b77b44a119@lechnology.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 20:13:41 -0600
From: David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>
To: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 02/44] clk: davinci: New driver for davinci PLL clocks
On 01/12/2018 03:21 AM, Sekhar Nori wrote:
> On Monday 08 January 2018 07:47 AM, David Lechner wrote:
>> +static unsigned long davinci_pll_clk_recalc(struct clk_hw *hw,
>> + unsigned long parent_rate)
>> +{
>> + struct davinci_pll_clk *pll = to_davinci_pll_clk(hw);
>> + unsigned long rate = parent_rate;
>> + u32 prediv, mult, postdiv;
>> +
>> + prediv = readl(pll->base + PREDIV) & PREDIV_RATIO_MASK;
>> + mult = readl(pll->base + PLLM) & PLLM_MASK;
>> + postdiv = readl(pll->base + POSTDIV) & POSTDIV_RATIO_MASK;
>
> Shouldn't we check if the pre and post dividers are enabled before using
> them?
I dug into this and the answer is no. The enable bit acts like a gate, not
a bypass, so it does not affect the rate calculation.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists