linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 3 (clk/clk-rp1.c)

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]

Message-ID: <aEGhHy7qPyIjG5Xp@apocalypse>
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2025 15:52:31 +0200
From: Andrea della Porta <andrea.porta@...e.com>
To: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>
Cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrea della Porta <andrea.porta@...e.com>,
	linux-clk@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 3 (clk/clk-rp1.c)

On 20:06 Wed 04 Jun     , Florian Fainelli wrote:
> 
> 
> On 6/3/2025 10:01 AM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 6/3/25 12:00 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > Please do not add any material destined for v6.17 to you rlinux-next
> > > included branches until after v6.16-rc1 has been released.
> > > 
> > > Changes since 20250530:
> > > 
> > 
> > on i386:
> > 
> > ld: drivers/clk/clk-rp1.o: in function `rp1_pll_divider_set_rate':
> > clk-rp1.c:(.text+0xba1): undefined reference to `__udivdi3'
> > 
> > caused by
> > 	/* must sleep 10 pll vco cycles */
> > 	ndelay(10ULL * div * NSEC_PER_SEC / parent_rate);
> > 
> > 
> 
> Andrea, do you mind fixing this build error for a 32-bit kernel? Thanks!

Sorry for the delay, this should fix it:

@@ -754,7 +769,7 @@ static int rp1_pll_divider_set_rate(struct clk_hw *hw,
        clockman_write(clockman, data->ctrl_reg, sec);
 
        /* must sleep 10 pll vco cycles */
-       ndelay(10ULL * div * NSEC_PER_SEC / parent_rate);
+       ndelay(div64_ul(10ULL * div * NSEC_PER_SEC, parent_rate));
 
        sec &= ~PLL_SEC_RST;
        clockman_write(clockman, data->ctrl_reg, sec);

should I send a new patch with this fix only (against linux-next or stblinux/next?)
or Florian is it better if you make the change in your next branch directly?

Many thanks,
Andrea

> -- 
> Florian
>