From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com (Maxime Ripard) Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 09:43:14 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 1/8] clk: sunxi: factors: Add m_start parameters In-Reply-To: References: <1430565879-28113-1-git-send-email-maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> <1430565879-28113-2-git-send-email-maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <20150515074314.GQ4004@lukather> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 05:12:07PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Maxime Ripard > wrote: > > Some clocks start incrementing the m factor at 0. Add a parameter to handle > > it just like we did for the N factor. > > > > Since the behaviour until now was to assume that the m factor was starting > > at 1, we also need to fix the other users. > > > > Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard > > --- > > drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-factors.c | 11 ++++++++++- > > drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-factors.h | 2 ++ > > drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-mod0.c | 2 ++ > > drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-sun8i-mbus.c | 2 ++ > > drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-sun9i-core.c | 6 ++++++ > > drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-sunxi.c | 10 ++++++++++ > > 6 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-factors.c b/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-factors.c > > index 8c20190a3e9f..100a711c3e3d 100644 > > --- a/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-factors.c > > +++ b/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-factors.c > > @@ -56,15 +56,24 @@ static unsigned long clk_factors_recalc_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, > > /* Get each individual factor if applicable */ > > if (config->nwidth != SUNXI_FACTORS_NOT_APPLICABLE) > > n = FACTOR_GET(config->nshift, config->nwidth, reg); > > + > > if (config->kwidth != SUNXI_FACTORS_NOT_APPLICABLE) > > k = FACTOR_GET(config->kshift, config->kwidth, reg); > > + > > if (config->mwidth != SUNXI_FACTORS_NOT_APPLICABLE) > > m = FACTOR_GET(config->mshift, config->mwidth, reg); > > + else > > + /* Make sure we don't get a division by zero */ > > + m = 1; > > What happens when mwidth is valid, m_start = 0, and m = 0? That's a very good question. A division by zero in the kernel, I'd say. But I don't think we can end up in such a case today, and it's somewhat expected that it will happen, and no clock have looked at can actually end up in such a case. > Other than that, this one looks good. Thanks! -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: