Re: [PATCH v2 6/7] i2c: npcm: use i2c frequency table

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>]

On Sun, Sep 01, 2024 at 06:53:38PM +0300, Tali Perry wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 10:19 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 11:46:39AM +0800, Tyrone Ting wrote:
> > > Modify i2c frequency from table parameters
> > > for NPCM i2c modules.
> > >
> > > Supported frequencies are:
> > >
> > > 1. 100KHz
> > > 2. 400KHz
> > > 3. 1MHz
> >
> > There is no explanations "why". What's wrong with the calculations done in the
> > current code?
> >
> > --
> > With Best Regards,
> > Andy Shevchenko
> >
> >
> Hi Andy,
> 
> The original equations were tested on a variety of chips and base clocks.
> Since we added devices that use higher frequencies of the module we
> saw that there is a mismatch between the equation and the actual
> results on the bus itself, measured on scope.
> So instead of using the equations we did an optimization per module
> frequency, verified on a device.
> Most of the work was focused on the rise time of the SCL and SDA,
> which depends on external load of the bus and PU.
> We needed to make sure that in all valid range of load the rise time
> is compliant of the SMB spec timing requirements.
> 
> This patch include the final values after extensive testing both at
> Nuvoton as well as at customer sites.

But:
1) why is it better than do calculations?
2) can it be problematic on theoretically different PCB design in the future?

P.S. If there is a good explanations to these and more, elaborate this in the
commit message.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko