Re: [PATCH v2] clk: bcm2835: Round UART input clock up

["Ivan T. Ivanov" <iivanov@suse.de>]

On 04-18 13:22, Stefan Wahren wrote:
> 
> Hi Ivan,
> 
> Am 18.04.22 um 13:05 schrieb Ivan T. Ivanov:
> > Hi Stefan,
> > 
> > On 04-15 10:52, Stefan Wahren wrote:
> > > Hi Ivan,
> > > 
> > > Am 14.04.22 um 12:56 schrieb Ivan T. Ivanov:
> > > > Hi Stefan,
> > > > 
> > > > Please, could you take a look into following patch?
> > > yes, but i cannot give a technical review. But from my gut feeling this
> > > doesn't look really elegant to me.
> > > > Thanks!
> > > > Ivan
> > > > 
> > > > On 04-04 15:51, Ivan T. Ivanov wrote:
> > > > > Subject: [PATCH v2] clk: bcm2835: Round UART input clock up
> > > > > Message-Id: <20220404125113.80239-1-iivanov@suse.de>
> > > > > 
> > > > > The UART clock is initialised to be as close to the requested
> > > > > frequency as possible without exceeding it. Now that there is a
> > > > > clock manager that returns the actual frequencies, an expected
> > > > > 48MHz clock is reported as 47999625. If the requested baudrate
> > > > > == requested clock/16, there is no headroom and the slight
> > > > > reduction in actual clock rate results in failure.
> > > > > 
> > > > > If increasing a clock by less than 0.1% changes it from ..999..
> > > > > to ..000.., round it up.
> > > Based on this commit message this looks like a fix / workaround for an
> > > issue. It would be very helpful to know:
> > > 
> > > What issue should be fixed?
> > > 
> > > Why is it fixed here and not in the UART driver for instance?
> > The UART driver is amba-pl011. Original fix, see below Github link,
> > was inside pl011 module, but somehow it didn't look as the right
> > place either. Beside that this rounding function is not exactly
> > perfect for all possible clock values. So I deiced to move the hack
> > to the platform which actually need it.
> thanks for your explanation. These are import information which belongs in
> the commit log, because the motivation and the affected UART is very
> important.
> > 
> > > In case it fixes a regression, a Fixes tag should be necessary.
> > I found the issue because it was reported that RPi3[1] and RPi Zero 2W
> > boards have issues with the Bluetooth. So it turns out that when
> > switching from initial to operation speed host and device no longer
> > can talk each other because host uses incorrect baud rate.
> 
> Now i remember this issue, for the mainline kernel we decide to workaround
> the issue by lowering the BT baudrate to 2000000 baud.

I have workaranded this the same, at first, but then decided to look at
vendor tree and voilà!

> I didn't investigate
> the issue further, but your approach is a better solution.
> 
> Do you use the mainline DTS or the vendor DTS to see this issue?
> 

For (open)SUSE we use downstream DTS.

Do you think that if I put better description in commit message fix will
be more acceptable. Or if someone could suggest anything else I am open
to discussion.

Regards,
Ivan