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  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]
Date:   Thu, 22 Jul 2021 17:43:49 +0800
From:   Liu Ying <>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <>,
        Heiko Stuebner <>,
        Elaine Zhang <>,
        Stephen Boyd <>,,,,,
        Michael Turquette <>,
        NXP Linux Team <>,
        Jacky Bai <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] clk: fractional-divider: Introduce NO_PRESCALER

On Thu, 2021-07-22 at 12:38 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 12:33 PM Liu Ying <> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2021-07-16 at 16:34 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > The newly introduced flag, when set, makes the flow to skip
> > > the assumption that the caller will use an additional 2^scale
> > > prescaler to get the desired clock rate.
> > 
> > As I mentioned in v1 comment, it seems to be good to decouple the
> > prescaler knowledge from this common fractional divider clk driver.
> > This way, we'll make it simpler and easier to maintain. Also, then, the
> > NO_PRESCALER flag is not needed at all.  However, it seems that two
> > Intel drivers which use the frational divider drivers will be affected
> > and rate negotiation logics need to be implemented for them.  Please
> > consider if it's doable or not.
> The current driver works for the certain hardware without this change.
> If you think it's better, submit a proposal we will discuss.

Well, I'm not afford to do so. Just share an idea. I haven't got the
intel HW to test.  As I mentioned in v1 comment, it seems that you have
experience on relevent drivers and HW to test, may I encourage you to
do that :-) Or forget that if you really think you won't do that.

> > If we ultimately keep the prescaler knowledge here, please consider to
> > add the NO_PRESCALER flag for i.MX7ulp as it hasn't the prescaler IIUC.
> You mean there is a code which is currently using this driver w/o
> taking into account this prescaller flavour? Can you, please, point
> out, I'll definitely update it. Thanks for the catch!


Liu Ying


Powered by blists - more mailing lists