All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
To: jacopo mondi <jacopo@jmondi.org>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@jmondi.org>,
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>,
	Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>,
	Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
	Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>,
	Linux-sh list <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-clk <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sh: clk: Relax clk rate match test
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 13:55:20 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1598767.1mUcEZddqr@avalon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180126162454.GA11798@w540>

Hi Jacopo,

On Friday, 26 January 2018 18:24:54 EET jacopo mondi wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 03:39:32PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > Hi Jacopo,
> 
> [snip]
> 
> >>>> ---
> >>>> 
> >>>>  drivers/sh/clk/core.c | 9 ++++++---
> >>>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>>> 
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/sh/clk/core.c b/drivers/sh/clk/core.c
> >>>> index 92863e3..d2cb94c 100644
> >>>> --- a/drivers/sh/clk/core.c
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/sh/clk/core.c
> >>>> @@ -198,9 +198,12 @@ int clk_rate_table_find(struct clk *clk,
> >>>>  {
> >>>>         struct cpufreq_frequency_table *pos;
> >>>> 
> >>>> -       cpufreq_for_each_valid_entry(pos, freq_table)
> >>>> -               if (pos->frequency == rate)
> >>>> -                       return pos - freq_table;
> >>>> +       cpufreq_for_each_valid_entry(pos, freq_table) {
> >>>> +               if (pos->frequency > rate)
> >>>> +                       continue;
> >>> 
> >>> This assumes all frequency tables are sorted.
> >>> 
> >>> Shouldn't you pick the closest frequency?
> >>> 
> >>> However, that's what clk_rate_table_round() does, which is called from
> >>> 
> >>> sh_clk_div_round_rate(), and thus already used as .round_rate:
> >>> 
> >>>     static struct sh_clk_ops sh_clk_div_enable_clk_ops = {
> >>>             .recalc         = sh_clk_div_recalc,
> >>>             .set_rate       = sh_clk_div_set_rate,
> >>>             .round_rate     = sh_clk_div_round_rate,
> >>>             .enable         = sh_clk_div_enable,
> >>>             .disable        = sh_clk_div_disable,
> >>>     
> >>>     };
> >> 
> >> Does this implies clock rates should be set using clk_round_rate() and
> >> not clk_set_rate() if I understand this right?
> > 
> > Not necessarily...
> > 
> > Note that both cpg_div6_clock_round_rate() and cpg_div6_clock_set_rate()
> > in the CCF implementation for DIV6 clocks use rounding.
> 
> Yeah but it doesn't seem to me that CCF implementation for DIV6 clocks does
> have to walk static tables like the old sh clock driver does. They
> perform rounding, but on the clock dividers given a requested rate
> and the respective parent clock, if I'm not wrong.

While clk_set_rate() doesn't explicitly document that the rate will be 
rounded, the clk_round_rate() documentation does:

/**
 * clk_round_rate - adjust a rate to the exact rate a clock can provide
 * @clk: clock source
 * @rate: desired clock rate in Hz
 *
 * This answers the question "if I were to pass @rate to clk_set_rate(),
 * what clock rate would I end up with?" without changing the hardware
 * in any way.  In other words:
 *
 *   rate = clk_round_rate(clk, r);
 *
 * and:
 *
 *   clk_set_rate(clk, r);
 *   rate = clk_get_rate(clk);
 *
 * are equivalent except the former does not modify the clock hardware
 * in any way.
 *
 * Returns rounded clock rate in Hz, or negative errno.
 */

So I think the SH implementation of clk_set_rate() should round rates.

(And feel free to send a patch for the clk_set_rate() documentation in 
include/linux/clk.h to state explicitly that the rate will be rounded).

> Anyway, in this case a much simpler:
> clk_set_rate(video_clk, clk_round_rate(video_clk, 10000000));
> does the job for Migo-R.
> 
> I will include this in next CEU iterations, since I already have a
> small comment from you to fix there ;)

That should not be needed, but if the above code is in a board file, I can 
live with that until drivers/sh/clk/ gets fixed.

> >>> (clk_rate_table_find() is called from sh_clk_div_set_rate())
> >>> 
> >>> Or are you supposed to ask for the exact clock rate? Where does the 10
> >>> MHz come from?
> >> 
> >> From board initialization code, in order to provide a valid input
> >> clock to OV7720 sensor.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
To: jacopo mondi <jacopo@jmondi.org>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@jmondi.org>,
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>,
	Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>,
	Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
	Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>,
	Linux-sh list <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-clk <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sh: clk: Relax clk rate match test
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 11:55:20 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1598767.1mUcEZddqr@avalon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180126162454.GA11798@w540>

Hi Jacopo,

On Friday, 26 January 2018 18:24:54 EET jacopo mondi wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 03:39:32PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > Hi Jacopo,
> 
> [snip]
> 
> >>>> ---
> >>>> 
> >>>>  drivers/sh/clk/core.c | 9 ++++++---
> >>>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>>> 
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/sh/clk/core.c b/drivers/sh/clk/core.c
> >>>> index 92863e3..d2cb94c 100644
> >>>> --- a/drivers/sh/clk/core.c
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/sh/clk/core.c
> >>>> @@ -198,9 +198,12 @@ int clk_rate_table_find(struct clk *clk,
> >>>>  {
> >>>>         struct cpufreq_frequency_table *pos;
> >>>> 
> >>>> -       cpufreq_for_each_valid_entry(pos, freq_table)
> >>>> -               if (pos->frequency = rate)
> >>>> -                       return pos - freq_table;
> >>>> +       cpufreq_for_each_valid_entry(pos, freq_table) {
> >>>> +               if (pos->frequency > rate)
> >>>> +                       continue;
> >>> 
> >>> This assumes all frequency tables are sorted.
> >>> 
> >>> Shouldn't you pick the closest frequency?
> >>> 
> >>> However, that's what clk_rate_table_round() does, which is called from
> >>> 
> >>> sh_clk_div_round_rate(), and thus already used as .round_rate:
> >>> 
> >>>     static struct sh_clk_ops sh_clk_div_enable_clk_ops = {
> >>>             .recalc         = sh_clk_div_recalc,
> >>>             .set_rate       = sh_clk_div_set_rate,
> >>>             .round_rate     = sh_clk_div_round_rate,
> >>>             .enable         = sh_clk_div_enable,
> >>>             .disable        = sh_clk_div_disable,
> >>>     
> >>>     };
> >> 
> >> Does this implies clock rates should be set using clk_round_rate() and
> >> not clk_set_rate() if I understand this right?
> > 
> > Not necessarily...
> > 
> > Note that both cpg_div6_clock_round_rate() and cpg_div6_clock_set_rate()
> > in the CCF implementation for DIV6 clocks use rounding.
> 
> Yeah but it doesn't seem to me that CCF implementation for DIV6 clocks does
> have to walk static tables like the old sh clock driver does. They
> perform rounding, but on the clock dividers given a requested rate
> and the respective parent clock, if I'm not wrong.

While clk_set_rate() doesn't explicitly document that the rate will be 
rounded, the clk_round_rate() documentation does:

/**
 * clk_round_rate - adjust a rate to the exact rate a clock can provide
 * @clk: clock source
 * @rate: desired clock rate in Hz
 *
 * This answers the question "if I were to pass @rate to clk_set_rate(),
 * what clock rate would I end up with?" without changing the hardware
 * in any way.  In other words:
 *
 *   rate = clk_round_rate(clk, r);
 *
 * and:
 *
 *   clk_set_rate(clk, r);
 *   rate = clk_get_rate(clk);
 *
 * are equivalent except the former does not modify the clock hardware
 * in any way.
 *
 * Returns rounded clock rate in Hz, or negative errno.
 */

So I think the SH implementation of clk_set_rate() should round rates.

(And feel free to send a patch for the clk_set_rate() documentation in 
include/linux/clk.h to state explicitly that the rate will be rounded).

> Anyway, in this case a much simpler:
> clk_set_rate(video_clk, clk_round_rate(video_clk, 10000000));
> does the job for Migo-R.
> 
> I will include this in next CEU iterations, since I already have a
> small comment from you to fix there ;)

That should not be needed, but if the above code is in a board file, I can 
live with that until drivers/sh/clk/ gets fixed.

> >>> (clk_rate_table_find() is called from sh_clk_div_set_rate())
> >>> 
> >>> Or are you supposed to ask for the exact clock rate? Where does the 10
> >>> MHz come from?
> >> 
> >> From board initialization code, in order to provide a valid input
> >> clock to OV7720 sensor.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart


  reply	other threads:[~2018-01-29 11:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-01-25 11:24 [PATCH] sh: clk: Relax clk rate match test Jacopo Mondi
2018-01-25 11:24 ` Jacopo Mondi
2018-01-25 13:53 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-01-25 13:53   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-01-25 14:14   ` jacopo mondi
2018-01-25 14:14     ` jacopo mondi
2018-01-25 14:39     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-01-25 14:39       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-01-26 16:24       ` jacopo mondi
2018-01-26 16:24         ` jacopo mondi
2018-01-29 11:55         ` Laurent Pinchart [this message]
2018-01-29 11:55           ` Laurent Pinchart

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1598767.1mUcEZddqr@avalon \
    --to=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
    --cc=dalias@libc.org \
    --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=jacopo+renesas@jmondi.org \
    --cc=jacopo@jmondi.org \
    --cc=kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com \
    --cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=magnus.damm@gmail.com \
    --cc=ysato@users.sourceforge.jp \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.