| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <DB3PR0402MB3916BF3B94E3F2206D0C7954F5390@DB3PR0402MB3916.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 12:34:36 +0000
From: Anson Huang <anson.huang@....com>
To: Aisheng Dong <aisheng.dong@....com>,
"mturquette@...libre.com" <mturquette@...libre.com>,
"sboyd@...nel.org" <sboyd@...nel.org>,
"shawnguo@...nel.org" <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
"s.hauer@...gutronix.de" <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
"kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
"festevam@...il.com" <festevam@...il.com>,
"linux-clk@...r.kernel.org" <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] clk: imx: add fractional-N pll support to pllv4
Hi, Aisheng
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aisheng Dong
> Sent: Monday, April 29, 2019 7:28 PM
> To: Anson Huang <anson.huang@....com>; mturquette@...libre.com;
> sboyd@...nel.org; shawnguo@...nel.org; s.hauer@...gutronix.de;
> kernel@...gutronix.de; festevam@...il.com; linux-clk@...r.kernel.org;
> linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] clk: imx: add fractional-N pll support to pllv4
>
> > From: Anson Huang
> > Sent: Monday, April 29, 2019 11:19 AM
> >
>
> clk: imx: pllv4: add fractional-N pll support
Will improve it in V2.
> > The pllv4 supports fractional-N function, the formula is:
> >
> > PLL output freq = input * (mult + num/denom),
> >
> > This patch adds fractional-N function support, including clock round
> > rate, calculate rate and set rate, with this patch, the clock rate of
> > APLL in clock tree is more accurate than before:
> >
> > Without fraction:
> > apll_pre_sel 1 1 1 24000000
> > 0 0 50000
> > apll_pre_div 1 1 2 24000000
> > 0 0 50000
> > apll 1 1 2 528000000
> > 0 0 50000
> > apll_pfd3 0 0 0 792000000
> > 0 0 50000
> > apll_pfd2 0 0 0 339428571
> > 0 0 50000
> > apll_pfd1 0 0 0 352000000
> > 0 0 50000
> > usdhc0 0 0 0 352000000
> > 0 0 50000
> > apll_pfd0 1 1 1 352000000
> > 0 0 50000
> >
> > With fraction:
> > apll_pre_sel 1 1 1 24000000
> > 0 0 50000
> > apll_pre_div 1 1 2 24000000
> > 0 0 50000
> > apll 1 1 2 529200000
> > 0 0 50000
> > apll_pfd3 0 0 0 793800000
> > 0 0 50000
> > apll_pfd2 0 0 0 340200000
> > 0 0 50000
> > apll_pfd1 0 0 0 352800000
> > 0 0 50000
> > usdhc0 0 0 0 352800000
> > 0 0 50000
> > apll_pfd0 1 1 1 352800000
> > 0 0 50000
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Anson Huang <Anson.Huang@....com>
> > ---
> > drivers/clk/imx/clk-pllv4.c | 68
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> > 1 file changed, 60 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/clk/imx/clk-pllv4.c b/drivers/clk/imx/clk-pllv4.c
> > index d38bc9f..4ced5ca 100644
> > --- a/drivers/clk/imx/clk-pllv4.c
> > +++ b/drivers/clk/imx/clk-pllv4.c
> > @@ -64,13 +64,18 @@ static unsigned long clk_pllv4_recalc_rate(struct
> > clk_hw *hw,
> > unsigned long parent_rate)
> > {
> > struct clk_pllv4 *pll = to_clk_pllv4(hw);
> > - u32 div;
> > + u32 mult = readl_relaxed(pll->base + PLL_CFG_OFFSET);
> > + u32 mfn = readl_relaxed(pll->base + PLL_NUM_OFFSET);
> > + u32 mfd = readl_relaxed(pll->base + PLL_DENOM_OFFSET);
>
> Nitpick:
> We usually don't write code like this.
> How about separate the assignment from declaration?
I will improve them in V2.
>
> > + u64 temp64 = parent_rate;
> >
> > - div = readl_relaxed(pll->base + PLL_CFG_OFFSET);
> > - div &= BM_PLL_MULT;
> > - div >>= BP_PLL_MULT;
> > + mult &= BM_PLL_MULT;
> > + mult >>= BP_PLL_MULT;
> >
> > - return parent_rate * div;
> > + temp64 *= mfn;
> > + do_div(temp64, mfd);
> > +
> > + return (parent_rate * mult) + (u32)temp64;
> > }
> >
> > static long clk_pllv4_round_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long
> > rate, @@
> > -78,14 +83,47 @@ static long clk_pllv4_round_rate(struct clk_hw *hw,
> > unsigned long rate, {
> > unsigned long parent_rate = *prate;
> > unsigned long round_rate, i;
> > + bool found = false;
> > + u32 mfn, mfd = 1000000;
> > + u32 max_mfd = 0x3FFFFFFF;
>
> Please keep sort from long to short.
> And the multi Max_mfd definitions could be move out the function and
> Defined use macro.
OK, will improve them in V2.
>
> > + u64 temp64;
> >
> > for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(pllv4_mult_table); i++) {
> > round_rate = parent_rate * pllv4_mult_table[i];
> > - if (rate >= round_rate)
> > - return round_rate;
> > + if (rate >= round_rate) {
> > + found = true;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (!found) {
> > + pr_warn("%s: unable to round rate %lu, parent rate %lu\n",
> > + clk_hw_get_name(hw), rate, parent_rate);
> > + return 0;
> > }
> >
> > - return round_rate;
> > + if (parent_rate <= max_mfd)
> > + mfd = parent_rate;
> > +
> > + temp64 = (u64)(rate - round_rate);
> > + temp64 *= mfd;
> > + do_div(temp64, parent_rate);
> > + mfn = temp64;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * NOTE: The value of numerator must always be configured to be
> > + * less than the value of the denominator. If we can't get a proper
> > + * pair of mfn/mfd, we simply return the round_rate without using
> > + * the frac part.
> > + */
> > + if (mfn >= mfd)
> > + return round_rate;
> > +
> > + temp64 = (u64)parent_rate;
> > + temp64 *= mfn;
> > + do_div(temp64, mfd);
> > +
> > + return round_rate + (u32)temp64;
> > }
> >
> > static bool clk_pllv4_is_valid_mult(unsigned int mult) @@ -106,17
> > +144,31 @@ static int clk_pllv4_set_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long
> rate, {
> > struct clk_pllv4 *pll = to_clk_pllv4(hw);
> > u32 val, mult;
> > + u32 mfn, mfd = 1000000;
> > + u32 max_mfd = 0x3FFFFFFF;
>
> Ditto
OK.
Thanks,
Anson.
>
> Otherwise:
> Reviewed-by: Dong Aisheng <aisheng.dong@....com>
>
> Regards
> Dong Aisheng
>
> > + u64 temp64;
> >
> > mult = rate / parent_rate;
> >
> > if (!clk_pllv4_is_valid_mult(mult))
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > + if (parent_rate <= max_mfd)
> > + mfd = parent_rate;
> > +
> > + temp64 = (u64)(rate - mult * parent_rate);
> > + temp64 *= mfd;
> > + do_div(temp64, parent_rate);
> > + mfn = temp64;
> > +
> > val = readl_relaxed(pll->base + PLL_CFG_OFFSET);
> > val &= ~BM_PLL_MULT;
> > val |= mult << BP_PLL_MULT;
> > writel_relaxed(val, pll->base + PLL_CFG_OFFSET);
> >
> > + writel_relaxed(mfn, pll->base + PLL_NUM_OFFSET);
> > + writel_relaxed(mfd, pll->base + PLL_DENOM_OFFSET);
> > +
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > --
> > 2.7.4
Powered by blists - more mailing lists