From: Du Huanpeng <dhu@hodcarrier.org>
To: Sean Anderson <seanga2@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Keguang Zhang <keguang.zhang@gmail.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
Yang Ling <gnaygnil@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFT PATCH] clk: ls1c: Fix PLL rate calculation
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 07:30:34 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220420233034.GA5694@black> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220419051114.1569291-1-seanga2@gmail.com>
On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 01:11:14AM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote:
> While reviewing Dhu's patch adding ls1c300 clock support to U-Boot [1], I
> noticed the following calculation, which is copied from
> drivers/clk/loongson1/clk-loongson1c.c:
Hi, the calculate method is based on Loongson's manual(龙芯 1C300
处理器用户手册 1.4)in page 35.
| 注: PLL 的分频系数 N 固定为 4, PLL 的频率计算公式如下:
| Freq_PLL = XIN *(M_PLL + FRAC_N)/4
I aslo made a tool to set pll rate and generate asm code at the same
time, I also put the formulae from the manual in code:
the tool:
[1]. https://github.com/hodcarrier/ls1c300_bsp/blob/master/clk-ls1c300.xlsx
lowlevel_init.S:
[2]. https://github.com/hodcarrier/u-boot/blob/lsmips/ls1c300b/arch/mips/mach-lsmips/ls1c300/lowlevel_init.S#L48
|/* Document:
| * Freq_PLL = XIN *(M_PLL + FRAC_N)/4
| */
The my v1 patch was using magic number for initialize pll, because I
use this tool to generate the code.
Set FRAC_N to 0, the pll can be adjust by step 6MHz. I noticed this
issues, you can see I always set the FRAC_N to 0 in the tool[1].
this will lost some pricise, but avoid to do the adventure...
>
> ulong ls1c300_pll_get_rate(struct clk *clk)
> {
> unsigned int mult;
> long long parent_rate;
> void *base;
> unsigned int val;
>
> parent_rate = clk_get_parent_rate(clk);
> base = (void *)clk->data;
>
> val = readl(base + START_FREQ);
> mult = FIELD_GET(FRAC_N, val) + FIELD_GET(M_PLL, val);
> return (mult * parent_rate) / 4;
> }
>
> I would like to examine the use of M_PLL and FRAC_N to calculate the multiplier
> for the PLL. The datasheet has the following to say:
>
> START_FREQ 位 缺省值 描述
> ========== ===== =========== ====================================
> FRAC_N 23:16 0 PLL 倍频系数的小数部分
>
> 由 PLL 倍频系数的整数部分
> M_PLL 15:8 NAND_D[3:0] (理论可以达到 255,建议不要超过 100)
> 配置
>
> which according to google translate means
>
> START_FREQ Bits Default Description
> ========== ===== ============= ================================================
> FRAC_N 23:16 0 Fractional part of the PLL multiplication factor
>
> Depends on Integer part of PLL multiplication factor
> M_PLL 15:8 NAND_D[3:0] (Theoretically it can reach 255, [but] it is
> configuration recommended not to exceed 100)
>
> So just based on this description, I would expect that the formula to be
> something like
>
> rate = parent * (255 * M_PLL + FRAC_N) / 255 / 4
>
> However, the datasheet also gives the following formula:
>
> rate = parent * (M_PLL + FRAC_N) / 4
>
> which is what the Linux driver has implemented. I find this very unusual.
> First, the datasheet specifically says that these fields are the integer and
> fractional parts of the multiplier. Second, I think such a construct does not
> easily map to traditional PLL building blocks. Implementing this formula in
> hardware would likely require an adder, just to then set the threshold of a
> clock divider.
>
> I think it is much more likely that the first formula is correct. The author of
> the datasheet may think of a multiplier of (say) 3.14 as
>
> M_PLL = 3
> FRAC_N = 0.14
>
> which together sum to the correct multiplier, even though the actual value
> stored in FRAC_N would be 36.
>
> I suspect that this has slipped by unnoticed because when FRAC_N is 0, there is
> no difference in the formulae. The following patch is untested, but I suspect
> it will fix this issue. I would appreciate if anyone with access to the
> hardware could measure the output of the PLL (or one of its derived clocks) and
> determine the correct formula.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/20220418204519.19991-1-dhu@hodcarrier.org/T/#u
>
> Fixes: b4626a7f4892 ("CLK: Add Loongson1C clock support")
> Signed-off-by: Sean Anderson <seanga2@gmail.com>
> ---
>
> drivers/clk/loongson1/clk-loongson1c.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/loongson1/clk-loongson1c.c b/drivers/clk/loongson1/clk-loongson1c.c
> index 703f87622cf5..2b98a116c1ea 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/loongson1/clk-loongson1c.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/loongson1/clk-loongson1c.c
> @@ -21,9 +21,9 @@ static unsigned long ls1x_pll_recalc_rate(struct clk_hw *hw,
> u32 pll, rate;
>
> pll = __raw_readl(LS1X_CLK_PLL_FREQ);
> - rate = ((pll >> 8) & 0xff) + ((pll >> 16) & 0xff);
> + rate = (pll & 0xff00) + ((pll >> 16) & 0xff);
> rate *= OSC;
> - rate >>= 2;
> + rate >>= 10;
>
> return rate;
> }
> --
> 2.35.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-20 23:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-19 5:11 [RFT PATCH] clk: ls1c: Fix PLL rate calculation Sean Anderson
2022-04-20 23:30 ` Du Huanpeng [this message]
2022-08-03 23:28 ` Sean Anderson
2022-08-09 18:06 ` Stephen Boyd
2022-08-18 3:36 ` Kelvin Cheung
2022-08-18 3:47 ` Sean Anderson
2022-11-09 3:47 ` Du Huanpeng
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=20220420233034.GA5694@black \
--to=dhu@hodcarrier.org \
--cc=gnaygnil@gmail.com \
--cc=keguang.zhang@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=seanga2@gmail.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.