From: "sboyd@codeaurora.org" <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
To: Eugeniy Paltsev <Eugeniy.Paltsev@synopsys.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"mark.rutland@arm.com" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
"mturquette@baylibre.com" <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
"robh+dt@kernel.org" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
"linux-clk@vger.kernel.org" <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARC: clk: introduce HSDKv1 pll driver
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2017 10:22:13 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170809172213.GB2146@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1502297028.2586.4.camel@synopsys.com>
On 08/09, Eugeniy Paltsev wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-08-03 at 18:53 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > On 07/14, Eugeniy Paltsev wrote:
> > > + /* input divider = reg.idiv + 1 */
> > > + idiv = 1 + ((val & CGU_PLL_CTRL_IDIV_MASK) >>
> > > CGU_PLL_CTRL_IDIV_SHIFT);
> > > + /* fb divider = 2*(reg.fbdiv + 1) */
> > > + fbdiv = 2 * (1 + ((val & CGU_PLL_CTRL_FBDIV_MASK) >>
> > > CGU_PLL_CTRL_FBDIV_SHIFT));
> > > + /* output divider = 2^(reg.odiv) */
> > > + odiv = 1 << ((val & CGU_PLL_CTRL_ODIV_MASK) >>
> > > CGU_PLL_CTRL_ODIV_SHIFT);
> >
> > Maybe just drop these comments. They're just repeating the code.
>
> Actually I would prefer to keep them, as "2^(reg.odiv)" is more
> human-readable then
> "1 << ((val & CGU_PLL_CTRL_ODIV_MASK) >> CGU_PLL_CTRL_ODIV_SHIFT)"
Alright.
>
> > > +
> > > + rate = (u64)parent_rate * fbdiv;
> > > + do_div(rate, idiv * odiv);
> > > +
> > > + return rate;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static long hsdk_pll_round_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long
> > > rate,
> > > + unsigned long *prate)
> > > +{
> > > + int i;
> > > + long best_rate;
> > > + struct hsdk_pll_clk *clk = to_hsdk_pll_clk(hw);
> > > + const struct hsdk_pll_cfg *pll_cfg = clk->pll_cfg;
> > > +
> > > + if (pll_cfg[0].rate == 0)
> > > + return -EINVAL;
> >
> > This happens?
>
> Only if we add bad hsdk_pll_cfg table. But it is quite cold code - we
> change pll configuration quite rare, so maybe it's better to keep this
> assert?
Can it be a BUILD_BUG_ON() somehow?
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: sboyd@codeaurora.org (sboyd@codeaurora.org)
To: linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ARC: clk: introduce HSDKv1 pll driver
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2017 10:22:13 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170809172213.GB2146@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1502297028.2586.4.camel@synopsys.com>
On 08/09, Eugeniy Paltsev wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-08-03@18:53 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > On 07/14, Eugeniy Paltsev wrote:
> > > + /* input divider = reg.idiv + 1 */
> > > + idiv = 1 + ((val & CGU_PLL_CTRL_IDIV_MASK) >>
> > > CGU_PLL_CTRL_IDIV_SHIFT);
> > > + /* fb divider = 2*(reg.fbdiv + 1) */
> > > + fbdiv = 2 * (1 + ((val & CGU_PLL_CTRL_FBDIV_MASK) >>
> > > CGU_PLL_CTRL_FBDIV_SHIFT));
> > > + /* output divider = 2^(reg.odiv) */
> > > + odiv = 1 << ((val & CGU_PLL_CTRL_ODIV_MASK) >>
> > > CGU_PLL_CTRL_ODIV_SHIFT);
> >
> > Maybe just drop these comments. They're just repeating the code.
>
> Actually I would prefer to keep them, as "2^(reg.odiv)" is more?
> human-readable then
> "1 << ((val & CGU_PLL_CTRL_ODIV_MASK) >> CGU_PLL_CTRL_ODIV_SHIFT)"
Alright.
>
> > > +
> > > + rate = (u64)parent_rate * fbdiv;
> > > + do_div(rate, idiv * odiv);
> > > +
> > > + return rate;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static long hsdk_pll_round_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long
> > > rate,
> > > + unsigned long *prate)
> > > +{
> > > + int i;
> > > + long best_rate;
> > > + struct hsdk_pll_clk *clk = to_hsdk_pll_clk(hw);
> > > + const struct hsdk_pll_cfg *pll_cfg = clk->pll_cfg;
> > > +
> > > + if (pll_cfg[0].rate == 0)
> > > + return -EINVAL;
> >?
> > This happens?
>
> Only if we add bad hsdk_pll_cfg table. But it is quite cold code - we
> change pll configuration quite rare, so maybe it's better to keep this
> assert?
Can it be a BUILD_BUG_ON() somehow?
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-09 17:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-14 15:31 [PATCH] ARC: clk: introduce HSDKv1 pll driver Eugeniy Paltsev
2017-07-14 15:31 ` Eugeniy Paltsev
2017-07-27 7:50 ` Vineet Gupta
2017-07-27 7:50 ` Vineet Gupta
2017-07-28 1:24 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-07-28 1:24 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-08-04 1:53 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-08-04 1:53 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-08-09 16:43 ` Eugeniy Paltsev
2017-08-09 16:43 ` Eugeniy Paltsev
2017-08-09 16:43 ` Eugeniy Paltsev
2017-08-09 17:22 ` sboyd [this message]
2017-08-09 17:22 ` sboyd
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=20170809172213.GB2146@codeaurora.org \
--to=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=Eugeniy.Paltsev@synopsys.com \
--cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mturquette@baylibre.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
/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.