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: <44c89b6b-edaa-4b0f-9306-a447ef2d9250@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2025 10:07:53 -0700
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To: Andrea della Porta <andrea.porta@...e.com>,
 Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>
Cc: 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>,
 linux-clk@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 3 (clk/clk-rp1.c)



On 6/5/25 6:52 AM, Andrea della Porta wrote:
> 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?

Yes, this fixes the 32-bit build error. Thanks.

Tested-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> # build-tested

-- 
~Randy