From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 441A5C433EF for ; Fri, 3 Dec 2021 17:33:20 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References: Message-ID:Date:Subject:CC:To:From:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=h5cZiKQ7yDeyUHwwgNBfF5CTCWunHn64Um2lPPOh/DU=; b=lCcmNucXxFzrEo 9zJ0EfkE+xFaP6edWcsczGEY20V4vINZz57by59/1HEzxPdYS+BMATcu2SLMIN8tQrOxKMpo1UcNq SALGUrGTYcRk+aMhVwu2Yc+D0ODj0f3bc7LmcLd7z1fAPTwgvrkQqO0+z33s/Vw3k9z9rhyxdt5j9 csumsJtoB61WWw2oofZfqMfPW5ZwH+qV27wB1s177AB7DT/bmnrGOoN9h52FBD+RWdxdJ6k5VOuT+ 3W4vjlPeDFLbxSIw5QCQ/clN3xJ2xQDz50SyGeAGQ29VEKwjds8N/ApuT8GtpV8QCNVN/pgr8fMW2 KAmhKDDOVqn/0F8fGOhg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mtCPM-00Gg82-QZ; Fri, 03 Dec 2021 17:31:40 +0000 Received: from mx4.securetransport.de ([178.254.6.145]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mtCPI-00Gg7c-Fx for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 03 Dec 2021 17:31:38 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dh-electronics.com; s=dhelectronicscom; t=1638552681; bh=dRpspd+7LZ4AL371RnTb3CNud+TOvc3EMyUFL5pNv/0=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Nl5hUT93HV1oF9R1pLjnxJxg+RzuANbFzTwebHdKwhrOlOrQxzjxyt/HO0P8ADdmD wS5Tca/O2MHKbWK3KBn7ST05iE2lPTO/KhzLw5+IibHnu9Jwy3FOxHmfJm1h7WKG7H BtXd+rGSUnHqSSSehihzmdFPMbgcoOf4G16S9CEmAt+l5a0foiT8aUCv5Ojpy6QMY2 cy1E0FaMU6am+U34M9WCeKOyloD9VQExZxE7wq50yLHfOex5GX7gIqErPMep9KcBka EyAnbz0O2ph4/rhiIv02WX6zUSULZFzYrtHlE9zcraQQSoBi1y/dtvBTX71HVE3naA lXSk+/QhvEgYg== X-secureTransport-forwarded: yes From: Christoph Niedermaier Complaints-To: abuse@cubewerk.de To: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" CC: Support Opensource , Adam Thomson , Wim Van Sebroeck , Andrej Picej , "linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Guenter Roeck Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH] watchdog: da9062: Correct the timeout values Thread-Topic: [RFC PATCH] watchdog: da9062: Correct the timeout values Thread-Index: AQHX6GQONgXT05Iq6ke/N4Kseos6o6wg6rAAgAATvjA= Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2021 17:31:10 +0000 Message-ID: <4bfb6ab512cd45ee81c55361525987b7@dh-electronics.com> References: <20211203163539.91870-1-cniedermaier@dh-electronics.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US Content-Language: de-DE X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20211203_093136_825349_BC508BDA X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 17.65 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org From: Guenter Roeck Sent: Friday, December 3, 2021 5:52 PM > On 12/3/21 8:35 AM, Christoph Niedermaier wrote: >> I measured the timeout values of my DA9061 chip. According to the >> information in the data sheet the formula should be: >> >> timeout = 2.048 * 2^(regval - 1) >> >> But my measured values differ from that. >> Accoring to my measured values the formula must be: >> >> timeout = 3.2 * 2^(regval - 1) >> >> Is there something wrong with my chip, or has anyone else noticed this as well? > > The driver assumes a static and well defined clock rate. Maybe that rate > is different in your system (if that is possible) ? > > Guenter @Andrej Do the values in the driver match what your chip does? I have not changed anything. After power on, the chip behaves like this. So I guess it either come from an OTP value or the wiring outside the chip. Does anyone know what needs to be checked? Thanks and regards Christoph >> Signed-off-by: Christoph Niedermaier >> Cc: Support Opensource >> Cc: Adam Thomson >> Cc: Wim Van Sebroeck >> Cc: Guenter Roeck >> Cc: Andrej Picej >> Cc: linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org >> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org >> --- >> drivers/watchdog/da9062_wdt.c | 3 ++- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/da9062_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/da9062_wdt.c >> index f02cbd530538..d2576aba9ca5 100644 >> --- a/drivers/watchdog/da9062_wdt.c >> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/da9062_wdt.c >> @@ -20,7 +20,8 @@ >> #include >> #include >> >> -static const unsigned int wdt_timeout[] = { 0, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 65, 131 }; >> +static const unsigned int wdt_timeout[] = { 0, 3, 6, 12, 25, 51, 102, 204 }; >> + >> #define DA9062_TWDSCALE_DISABLE 0 >> #define DA9062_TWDSCALE_MIN 1 >> #define DA9062_TWDSCALE_MAX (ARRAY_SIZE(wdt_timeout) - 1) >> _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel