All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
To: Lennart Sorensen <lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
Cc: Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@ti.com>,
	t-kristo@ti.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: omap5/dra7xx: Fix counter frequency drift for AM572x errata i856.
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 13:33:24 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54908904.9060908@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141216192740.GN24110@csclub.uwaterloo.ca>

On 12/16/2014 01:27 PM, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
>> I see why arch_timer_freq might skip the rounding error of 39, 15 and
>> 55 Vs existing logic which is possibly at a truncation error risk
>> (without errata for sysclk 13, 26 and 27MHz).
>>
>> all you'd probably need to do is cast rate, num and den to unsigned
>> long and have a common computation logic.
> 
> If that is acceptable, then sure I can do that.  I liked avoiding casts
> in general though.
> 
>> if you'd really want to handle truncation error, it must be a separate
>> patch of it's own - I would not mix it with the errata fix.
> 
> Well there is no error in the existing code because the rate / den
> is always a clean integer division.  The problem is introduced by the

key is "there is no error in existing code for existing value" :) ->
the same code for new values will fail. and introducing (rate * num) /
den without cast will fail for old values.

> SYSCLK1 / 610 used by the emulated clock which is not a clean division.
> 
> So for the existing logic, the calculation was perfect.  It is only for
> the errata case that it is a problem.
> 
> So I think leaving the existing calculation but moved up works well,
> and then having the alternate order calculation only in the errata case
> seemed cleaner and avoids casts and 64bit math which I thought was
> overall desirable.

In general using DIV_ROUND_UP and family of macros(in kernel.h) is the
right way of doing division in similar cases in Linux kernel. And for
the same functionality, we want a common equation - if it does not fit
well for all values (even if we introduce new values), then we must
come to a better equation that will work for all values. What we do
not do is to have two equations meant for doing the same thing.


-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: nm@ti.com (Nishanth Menon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: omap5/dra7xx: Fix counter frequency drift for AM572x errata i856.
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 13:33:24 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54908904.9060908@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141216192740.GN24110@csclub.uwaterloo.ca>

On 12/16/2014 01:27 PM, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
>> I see why arch_timer_freq might skip the rounding error of 39, 15 and
>> 55 Vs existing logic which is possibly at a truncation error risk
>> (without errata for sysclk 13, 26 and 27MHz).
>>
>> all you'd probably need to do is cast rate, num and den to unsigned
>> long and have a common computation logic.
> 
> If that is acceptable, then sure I can do that.  I liked avoiding casts
> in general though.
> 
>> if you'd really want to handle truncation error, it must be a separate
>> patch of it's own - I would not mix it with the errata fix.
> 
> Well there is no error in the existing code because the rate / den
> is always a clean integer division.  The problem is introduced by the

key is "there is no error in existing code for existing value" :) ->
the same code for new values will fail. and introducing (rate * num) /
den without cast will fail for old values.

> SYSCLK1 / 610 used by the emulated clock which is not a clean division.
> 
> So for the existing logic, the calculation was perfect.  It is only for
> the errata case that it is a problem.
> 
> So I think leaving the existing calculation but moved up works well,
> and then having the alternate order calculation only in the errata case
> seemed cleaner and avoids casts and 64bit math which I thought was
> overall desirable.

In general using DIV_ROUND_UP and family of macros(in kernel.h) is the
right way of doing division in similar cases in Linux kernel. And for
the same functionality, we want a common equation - if it does not fit
well for all values (even if we introduce new values), then we must
come to a better equation that will work for all values. What we do
not do is to have two equations meant for doing the same thing.


-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
To: Lennart Sorensen <lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
Cc: Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@ti.com>, <t-kristo@ti.com>,
	<linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: omap5/dra7xx: Fix counter frequency drift for AM572x errata i856.
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 13:33:24 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54908904.9060908@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141216192740.GN24110@csclub.uwaterloo.ca>

On 12/16/2014 01:27 PM, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
>> I see why arch_timer_freq might skip the rounding error of 39, 15 and
>> 55 Vs existing logic which is possibly at a truncation error risk
>> (without errata for sysclk 13, 26 and 27MHz).
>>
>> all you'd probably need to do is cast rate, num and den to unsigned
>> long and have a common computation logic.
> 
> If that is acceptable, then sure I can do that.  I liked avoiding casts
> in general though.
> 
>> if you'd really want to handle truncation error, it must be a separate
>> patch of it's own - I would not mix it with the errata fix.
> 
> Well there is no error in the existing code because the rate / den
> is always a clean integer division.  The problem is introduced by the

key is "there is no error in existing code for existing value" :) ->
the same code for new values will fail. and introducing (rate * num) /
den without cast will fail for old values.

> SYSCLK1 / 610 used by the emulated clock which is not a clean division.
> 
> So for the existing logic, the calculation was perfect.  It is only for
> the errata case that it is a problem.
> 
> So I think leaving the existing calculation but moved up works well,
> and then having the alternate order calculation only in the errata case
> seemed cleaner and avoids casts and 64bit math which I thought was
> overall desirable.

In general using DIV_ROUND_UP and family of macros(in kernel.h) is the
right way of doing division in similar cases in Linux kernel. And for
the same functionality, we want a common equation - if it does not fit
well for all values (even if we introduce new values), then we must
come to a better equation that will work for all values. What we do
not do is to have two equations meant for doing the same thing.


-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon

  reply	other threads:[~2014-12-16 19:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-12-12 22:08 [PATCH 0/2] ARM: omap5/dra7xx counter frequency fixes Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-12 22:08 ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-12 22:08 ` [PATCH 1/2] ARM: omap5/dra7xx: Fix frequency typos Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-12 22:08   ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-16 11:38   ` Lokesh Vutla
2014-12-16 11:38     ` Lokesh Vutla
2014-12-16 11:38     ` Lokesh Vutla
2014-12-16 14:06   ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-16 14:06     ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-16 14:06     ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-16 16:39     ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-16 16:39       ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-12 22:08 ` [PATCH 2/2] ARM: omap5/dra7xx: Fix counter frequency drift for AM572x errata i856 Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-12 22:08   ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-14  4:45   ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-14  4:45     ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-16 11:35     ` Lokesh Vutla
2014-12-16 11:35       ` Lokesh Vutla
2014-12-16 11:35       ` Lokesh Vutla
2014-12-16 14:58       ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-16 14:58         ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-16 14:58         ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-16 16:36         ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-16 16:36           ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-16 18:59           ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-16 18:59             ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-16 18:59             ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-16 19:27             ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-16 19:27               ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-16 19:33               ` Nishanth Menon [this message]
2014-12-16 19:33                 ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-16 19:33                 ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-17 13:21         ` Tero Kristo
2014-12-17 13:21           ` Tero Kristo
2014-12-17 13:21           ` Tero Kristo
2014-12-17 14:55           ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-17 14:55             ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-17 15:22             ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-17 15:22               ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-17 15:22               ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-17 15:27               ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-17 15:27                 ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-17 15:45                 ` Tero Kristo
2014-12-17 15:45                   ` Tero Kristo
2014-12-17 15:45                   ` Tero Kristo
2014-12-17 15:49                   ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-17 15:49                     ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-17 15:53                   ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-17 15:53                     ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-17 15:53                     ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-17 15:56                     ` Tero Kristo
2014-12-17 15:56                       ` Tero Kristo
2014-12-17 15:56                       ` Tero Kristo
2014-12-16 16:16       ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-16 16:16         ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-16 19:56         ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-16 19:56           ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-16 19:56           ` Nishanth Menon
2014-12-16 19:58           ` Lennart Sorensen
2014-12-16 19:58             ` Lennart Sorensen

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=54908904.9060908@ti.com \
    --to=nm@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lokeshvutla@ti.com \
    --cc=lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca \
    --cc=nsekhar@ti.com \
    --cc=t-kristo@ti.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.