[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aJwnH2mlRdqp1K1u@stanley.mountain>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2025 08:48:15 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
To: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
Cc: Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>,
Marco Felsch <m.felsch@...gutronix.de>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
arm-scmi@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] clk: conf: Support assigned-clock-sscs
On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 08:17:06PM +0800, Peng Fan wrote:
> Parse the Spread Spectrum Configuration(SSC) from device tree and configure
> them before using the clock.
>
> Each SSC is three u32 elements which means '<modfreq spreaddepth
> modmethod>', so assigned-clock-sscs is an array of multiple three u32
> elements.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
> ---
> drivers/clk/clk-conf.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 70 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-conf.c b/drivers/clk/clk-conf.c
> index 303a0bb26e54a95655ce094a35b989c97ebc6fd8..81a2c1f8ca4c44df2c54c1e51f800f533c9453b3 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/clk-conf.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-conf.c
> @@ -155,6 +155,72 @@ static int __set_clk_rates(struct device_node *node, bool clk_supplier)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static int __set_clk_spread_spectrum(struct device_node *node, bool clk_supplier)
> +{
> + u32 *sscs __free(kfree) = NULL;
> + u32 elem_size = sizeof(u32) * 3;
> + struct of_phandle_args clkspec;
> + int rc, count, index;
> + struct clk *clk;
> +
> + /* modfreq, spreadPercent, modmethod */
> + count = of_property_count_elems_of_size(node, "assigned-clock-sscs", elem_size);
> + if (count > 0) {
> + sscs = kcalloc(count, elem_size, GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!sscs)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + rc = of_property_read_u32_array(node,
> + "assigned-clock-sscs",
> + sscs, count * 3);
> + } else {
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + if (rc)
> + return rc;
Nit pick: Please, flip these conditions around.
count = of_property_count_elems_of_size(node, "assigned-clock-sscs", elem_size);
if (count <= 0)
return 0;
sscs = kcalloc(count, elem_size, GFP_KERNEL);
if (!sscs)
return -ENOMEM;
rc = of_property_read_u32_array(node, "assigned-clock-sscs", sscs,
count * 3);
if (rc)
return rc;
> +
> + for (index = 0; index < count; index++) {
> + u32 modfreq_hz = sscs[index * 3], spread_bp = sscs[index * 3 + 1];
> + u32 method = sscs[index * 3 + 2];
This math would be nicer if you created a struct:
struct spread_config {
u32 modfreq_hz;
u32 spread_depth;
u32 method;
};
Then you could use that instead of sscs.
for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
struct spread_config *conf = &configs[i];
struct clk_hw *hw;
if (!conf->modfreq_hz && !conf->spread_depth && !conf->method)
continue;
> + struct clk_hw *hw;
> +
> + if (modfreq_hz || spread_bp || method) {
> + rc = of_parse_phandle_with_args(node, "assigned-clocks",
> + "#clock-cells", index, &clkspec);
> + if (rc < 0) {
> + /* skip empty (null) phandles */
> + if (rc == -ENOENT)
> + continue;
> + else
> + return rc;
> + }
> +
> + if (clkspec.np == node && !clk_supplier) {
Could you add a comment for this condition? It's strange to me that we
don't iterate through the whole array.
regards,
dan carpenter
> + of_node_put(clkspec.np);
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + clk = of_clk_get_from_provider(&clkspec);
> + of_node_put(clkspec.np);
> + if (IS_ERR(clk)) {
> + if (PTR_ERR(clk) != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> + pr_warn("clk: couldn't get clock %d for %pOF\n",
> + index, node);
> + return PTR_ERR(clk);
> + }
> +
> + hw = __clk_get_hw(clk);
> + rc = clk_hw_set_spread_spectrum(hw, modfreq_hz, spread_bp, method);
> + if (rc < 0)
> + pr_err("clk: couldn't set %s clk spread spectrum %u %u %u: %d\n",
> + __clk_get_name(clk), modfreq_hz, spread_bp, method, rc);
> + clk_put(clk);
> + }
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
Powered by blists - more mailing lists