[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181029085843.3bslqwktxbp2ywk2@flea>
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 09:58:43 +0100
From: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>
To: Jagan Teki <jagan@...rulasolutions.com>
Cc: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>, Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.io>,
Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...l.net>,
Vasily Khoruzhick <anarsoul@...il.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
linux-clk <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
Michael Trimarchi <michael@...rulasolutions.com>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/15] clk: sunxi-ng: Add check for minimal rate to
NKM PLLs
On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 04:25:59PM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 11:34 PM Maxime Ripard
> <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 09:20:22PM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote:
> > > Some NKM PLLs doesn't work well when their output clock rate is set below
> > > certain rate.
> > >
> > > So, add support for minimal rate for relevant PLLs.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@...rulasolutions.com>
> > > ---
> > > Changes for v2:
> > > - new patch
> > >
> > > drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_nkm.c | 7 +++++++
> > > drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_nkm.h | 1 +
> > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_nkm.c b/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_nkm.c
> > > index 841840e35e61..d17539dc88dd 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_nkm.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_nkm.c
> > > @@ -125,6 +125,13 @@ static unsigned long ccu_nkm_round_rate(struct ccu_mux_internal *mux,
> > > if (nkm->common.features & CCU_FEATURE_FIXED_POSTDIV)
> > > rate *= nkm->fixed_post_div;
> > >
> > > + if (rate < nkm->min_rate) {
> > > + rate = nkm->min_rate;
> > > + if (nkm->common.features & CCU_FEATURE_FIXED_POSTDIV)
> > > + rate /= nkm->fixed_post_div;
> >
> > I'm not sure this is right. Is the post divider taken into account to
> > calculate the minimum, or is the minimum on the rate before the fixed
> > post divider.
>
> Since we are returning from here, we need to take care post div which
> is actually doing at the end of round_rate.
That's not my point though. Does the rate needs to be superior to min
/ post_div, or min?
> >
> > How did you test this?
>
> I've not used this on PLL_MIPI atleast, so I didn't test this.
If you've never tested this, why are you adding that code?
Maxime
--
Maxime Ripard, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists