From: Mike Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>
To: "Mohammed, Afzal" <afzal@ti.com>, Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: RE: [PATCH v2 1/4] ARM: OMAP2+: dpll: round rate to closest value
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 14:20:32 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130125222032.10623.47200@quantum> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <C8443D0743D26F4388EA172BF4E2A7A93EA9388C@DBDE01.ent.ti.com>
Quoting Mohammed, Afzal (2013-01-25 04:18:22)
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 13:48:11, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Jan 2013, Afzal Mohammed wrote:
>
> > > Currently round rate function would return proper rate iff requested
> > > rate exactly matches the PLL lockable rate. This causes set_rate to
> > > fail if exact rate could not be set. Instead round rate may return
> > > closest rate possible (less than the requested). And if any user is
> > > badly in need of exact rate, then return value of round rate could
> > > be used to decide whether to invoke set rate or not.
> > >
> > > Modify round rate so that it return closest possible rate.
> >
> > This doesn't look like the right approach to me. For some PLLs, an exact
> > rate is desired.
>
> If exact rate is required, there is a way to achieve it as mentioned
> in the commit message, i.e. by first invoking round rate over reqd. rate
> and if it doesn't match, bail out w/o invoking set_rate.
>
> And it seems requirement of CCF w.r.t to round rate is to return closest
> possible rate.
Is MULT_ROUND_UP doing the right thing for you in the clk_divider code?
What is the clock rate requested of the parent PLL? I just want to make
sure that we're doing the right thing in the basic divider code.
Thanks,
Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-25 22:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-23 11:41 [PATCH v2 0/4] ARM: AM335x: LCDC platform support Afzal Mohammed
2013-01-23 11:41 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] ARM: OMAP2+: dpll: round rate to closest value Afzal Mohammed
2013-01-25 8:18 ` Paul Walmsley
2013-01-25 12:18 ` Mohammed, Afzal
2013-01-25 22:20 ` Mike Turquette [this message]
2013-01-28 9:25 ` Mohammed, Afzal
2013-01-28 7:24 ` Paul Walmsley
2013-01-29 9:42 ` Mohammed, Afzal
2013-01-23 11:42 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] ARM: OMAP2+: dpll: am335x - avoid freqsel Afzal Mohammed
2013-01-23 11:42 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] ARM: OMAP2+: clock: DEFINE_STRUCT_CLK_FLAGS helper Afzal Mohammed
2013-01-23 11:42 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] ARM: AM33XX: clock: SET_RATE_PARENT in lcd path Afzal Mohammed
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=20130125222032.10623.47200@quantum \
--to=mturquette@linaro.org \
--cc=afzal@ti.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=paul@pwsan.com \
--cc=tony@atomide.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).