From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lukasz Majewski Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: exynos4x12: Use the common clock framework to set APLL clock rate Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 15:10:22 +0200 Message-ID: <20130925151022.74df54a7@amdc308.digital.local> References: <1380108138-30402-1-git-send-email-l.majewski@samsung.com> <1380108138-30402-2-git-send-email-l.majewski@samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailout3.samsung.com ([203.254.224.33]:17385 "EHLO mailout3.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755289Ab3IYNKg (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Sep 2013 09:10:36 -0400 In-reply-to: Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Sachin Kamat Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Viresh Kumar , Linux PM list , Lukasz Majewski , linux-kernel , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Tomasz Figa , Myungjoo Ham , Kukjin Kim , Kukjin Kim , linux-samsung-soc Hi Sachin, > Hi Lukasz, > > On 25 September 2013 16:52, Lukasz Majewski > wrote: > > > > static void exynos4x12_set_apll(unsigned int index) > > { > > - unsigned int tmp, pdiv; > > + unsigned int tmp, freq = apll_freq_4x12[index].freq; > > nit: It is better to put the 'freq' assignment on a new line. checkpatch.pl wasn't complaining :-). Also please consider below comment. > > > > > - /* 1. MUX_CORE_SEL = MPLL, ARMCLK uses MPLL for lock time */ > > + /* MUX_CORE_SEL = MPLL, ARMCLK uses MPLL for lock time */ > > clk_set_parent(moutcore, mout_mpll); > > > > do { > > @@ -140,24 +140,9 @@ static void exynos4x12_set_apll(unsigned int > > index) tmp &= 0x7; > > } while (tmp != 0x2); > > > > - /* 2. Set APLL Lock time */ > > - pdiv = ((apll_freq_4x12[index].mps >> 8) & 0x3f); > > + clk_set_rate(mout_apll, freq * 1000); > > Don't we need to check the return value of this? The broken code isn't handling errors now (*_set_apll() function is defined as void). Since this patch is a regression fix (for v3.12) I just wanted to change as little as possible to provide a functional fix. I think that regression fix shall not change much functionality - therefore the exynosXXXX-cpufreq.c cleanup will be done for next kernel release. > > Same comments for the second patch too. > -- Best regards, Lukasz Majewski Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group