linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net 1/4] can: m_can: pci: fix incorrect reference clock rate

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]

Date:   Tue, 16 Nov 2021 16:50:38 +0200
From:   Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
Cc:     Matthias Schiffer <matthias.schiffer@...tq-group.com>,
        Chandrasekar Ramakrishnan <rcsekar@...sung.com>,
        Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "Felipe Balbi (Intel)" <balbi@...nel.org>,
        linux-can@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/4] can: m_can: pci: fix incorrect reference clock
 rate

On 11/16/21 9:15 AM, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> On 16.11.2021 09:11:40, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
>>> ip link set can0 type can bitrate 1000000 dbitrate 2000000 fd on
>>
>> I got confirmation the clock to CAN controller is indeed changed from 100
>> MHz to 200 MHz in release HW & firmware.
>>
>> I haven't upgraded the FW in a while on our HW so that perhaps explain
>> why I was seeing expected rate :-)
> 
> Can we query the FW version in the driver and set the clock rate
> accordingly?
> 
Perhaps or check some clock register. I guess for now it can be 
considered fixed clock since I understood rate was changed before 
released to customers. I.e. customers shouldn't have firmware with 
different rates. At least I hope so :-)

Jarkko