All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
To: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	mturquette@baylibre.com, heiko@sntech.de,
	christoph.muellner@theobroma-systems.com,
	zhangqing@rock-chips.com,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko.stuebner@theobroma-systems.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: rockchip: convert rk3036 pll type to use internal lock status
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 21:05:18 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200114050518.D3C40222C3@mail.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200113152656.2313846-1-heiko@sntech.de>

Quoting Heiko Stuebner (2020-01-13 07:26:56)
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c b/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c
> index 198417d56300..37378ded0993 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c
> @@ -118,12 +118,30 @@ static int rockchip_pll_wait_lock(struct rockchip_clk_pll *pll)
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON1_REFDIV_SHIFT            0
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON1_POSTDIV2_MASK           0x7
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON1_POSTDIV2_SHIFT          6
> +#define RK3036_PLLCON1_LOCK_STATUS             BIT(10)
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON1_DSMPD_MASK              0x1
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON1_DSMPD_SHIFT             12
> +#define RK3036_PLLCON1_PWRDOWN                 BIT(13)
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON2_FRAC_MASK               0xffffff
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON2_FRAC_SHIFT              0
>  
> -#define RK3036_PLLCON1_PWRDOWN                 (1 << 13)
> +static int rockchip_rk3036_pll_wait_lock(struct rockchip_clk_pll *pll)
> +{
> +       u32 pllcon;
> +       int delay = 24000000;
> +
> +       /* poll check the lock status in rk3399 xPLLCON2 */
> +       while (delay > 0) {
> +               pllcon = readl_relaxed(pll->reg_base + RK3036_PLLCON(1));
> +               if (pllcon & RK3036_PLLCON1_LOCK_STATUS)
> +                       return 0;
> +
> +               delay--;

There isn't any udelay here. So the timeout is just as fast as the CPU
can churn through this? Why not use an actual time? Or use the
readl_poll_timeout() APIs?

> +       }
> +
> +       pr_err("%s: timeout waiting for pll to lock\n", __func__);
> +       return -ETIMEDOUT;
> +}
>  
>  static void rockchip_rk3036_pll_get_params(struct rockchip_clk_pll *pll,
>                                         struct rockchip_pll_rate_table *rate)

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
To: linux-clk@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	mturquette@baylibre.com, heiko@sntech.de,
	christoph.muellner@theobroma-systems.com,
	zhangqing@rock-chips.com,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko.stuebner@theobroma-systems.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: rockchip: convert rk3036 pll type to use internal lock status
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 21:05:18 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200114050518.D3C40222C3@mail.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200113152656.2313846-1-heiko@sntech.de>

Quoting Heiko Stuebner (2020-01-13 07:26:56)
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c b/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c
> index 198417d56300..37378ded0993 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c
> @@ -118,12 +118,30 @@ static int rockchip_pll_wait_lock(struct rockchip_clk_pll *pll)
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON1_REFDIV_SHIFT            0
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON1_POSTDIV2_MASK           0x7
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON1_POSTDIV2_SHIFT          6
> +#define RK3036_PLLCON1_LOCK_STATUS             BIT(10)
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON1_DSMPD_MASK              0x1
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON1_DSMPD_SHIFT             12
> +#define RK3036_PLLCON1_PWRDOWN                 BIT(13)
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON2_FRAC_MASK               0xffffff
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON2_FRAC_SHIFT              0
>  
> -#define RK3036_PLLCON1_PWRDOWN                 (1 << 13)
> +static int rockchip_rk3036_pll_wait_lock(struct rockchip_clk_pll *pll)
> +{
> +       u32 pllcon;
> +       int delay = 24000000;
> +
> +       /* poll check the lock status in rk3399 xPLLCON2 */
> +       while (delay > 0) {
> +               pllcon = readl_relaxed(pll->reg_base + RK3036_PLLCON(1));
> +               if (pllcon & RK3036_PLLCON1_LOCK_STATUS)
> +                       return 0;
> +
> +               delay--;

There isn't any udelay here. So the timeout is just as fast as the CPU
can churn through this? Why not use an actual time? Or use the
readl_poll_timeout() APIs?

> +       }
> +
> +       pr_err("%s: timeout waiting for pll to lock\n", __func__);
> +       return -ETIMEDOUT;
> +}
>  
>  static void rockchip_rk3036_pll_get_params(struct rockchip_clk_pll *pll,
>                                         struct rockchip_pll_rate_table *rate)

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
To: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org
Cc: heiko@sntech.de,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko.stuebner@theobroma-systems.com>,
	mturquette@baylibre.com, zhangqing@rock-chips.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	christoph.muellner@theobroma-systems.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: rockchip: convert rk3036 pll type to use internal lock status
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 21:05:18 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200114050518.D3C40222C3@mail.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200113152656.2313846-1-heiko@sntech.de>

Quoting Heiko Stuebner (2020-01-13 07:26:56)
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c b/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c
> index 198417d56300..37378ded0993 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c
> @@ -118,12 +118,30 @@ static int rockchip_pll_wait_lock(struct rockchip_clk_pll *pll)
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON1_REFDIV_SHIFT            0
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON1_POSTDIV2_MASK           0x7
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON1_POSTDIV2_SHIFT          6
> +#define RK3036_PLLCON1_LOCK_STATUS             BIT(10)
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON1_DSMPD_MASK              0x1
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON1_DSMPD_SHIFT             12
> +#define RK3036_PLLCON1_PWRDOWN                 BIT(13)
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON2_FRAC_MASK               0xffffff
>  #define RK3036_PLLCON2_FRAC_SHIFT              0
>  
> -#define RK3036_PLLCON1_PWRDOWN                 (1 << 13)
> +static int rockchip_rk3036_pll_wait_lock(struct rockchip_clk_pll *pll)
> +{
> +       u32 pllcon;
> +       int delay = 24000000;
> +
> +       /* poll check the lock status in rk3399 xPLLCON2 */
> +       while (delay > 0) {
> +               pllcon = readl_relaxed(pll->reg_base + RK3036_PLLCON(1));
> +               if (pllcon & RK3036_PLLCON1_LOCK_STATUS)
> +                       return 0;
> +
> +               delay--;

There isn't any udelay here. So the timeout is just as fast as the CPU
can churn through this? Why not use an actual time? Or use the
readl_poll_timeout() APIs?

> +       }
> +
> +       pr_err("%s: timeout waiting for pll to lock\n", __func__);
> +       return -ETIMEDOUT;
> +}
>  
>  static void rockchip_rk3036_pll_get_params(struct rockchip_clk_pll *pll,
>                                         struct rockchip_pll_rate_table *rate)

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2020-01-14  5:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-01-13 15:26 [PATCH] clk: rockchip: convert rk3036 pll type to use internal lock status Heiko Stuebner
2020-01-13 15:26 ` Heiko Stuebner
2020-01-13 15:26 ` Heiko Stuebner
2020-01-14  5:05 ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2020-01-14  5:05   ` Stephen Boyd
2020-01-14  5:05   ` Stephen Boyd
2020-01-28 10:26   ` Heiko Stuebner
2020-01-28 10:26     ` Heiko Stuebner

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=20200114050518.D3C40222C3@mail.kernel.org \
    --to=sboyd@kernel.org \
    --cc=christoph.muellner@theobroma-systems.com \
    --cc=heiko.stuebner@theobroma-systems.com \
    --cc=heiko@sntech.de \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=mturquette@baylibre.com \
    --cc=zhangqing@rock-chips.com \
    /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.