From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 10:56:25 +0000
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] clk: rcar-h2: fix sd0/sd1 divisor table
Message-Id: <2083213.7oCTVAqWbC@avalon>
List-Id: <linux-sh.vger.kernel.org>
References: <1391537858-28593-1-git-send-email-william.towle@codethink.co.uk>
 <1391537858-28593-2-git-send-email-william.towle@codethink.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <1391537858-28593-2-git-send-email-william.towle@codethink.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org

Hi William,

Thank you for the patch.

On Tuesday 04 February 2014 18:17:36 William Towle wrote:
> The clk_div_table for cpg_sd01_div_table[] concurs with the manual
> but not with values found in the device itself (which are also the
> same as the ones in arch/arm/mach-shmobile/clock-r8a7790.c).
> 
> Update the clk-rcar-gen2.c driver to have the same table as the one
> used by the mach-shmobile driver which work once further issues are
> fixed in the clk-rcar-gen2.c driver.
> 
> Part of the fix for the following error where the driver reports the
> output as 1MHz but is really 97.5MHz:
>     sh_mobile_sdhi ee100000.sd: mmc0 base at 0xee100000 clock rate 1 MHz
> 
> [ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk: updated patch description]
> Signed-off-by: William Towle <william.towle@codethink.co.uk>
> Reviewed-by: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/shmobile/clk-rcar-gen2.c |    2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/shmobile/clk-rcar-gen2.c
> b/drivers/clk/shmobile/clk-rcar-gen2.c index a59ec21..df4a1e6 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/shmobile/clk-rcar-gen2.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/shmobile/clk-rcar-gen2.c
> @@ -170,6 +170,8 @@ static const struct clk_div_table cpg_sdh_div_table[] > { };
> 
>  static const struct clk_div_table cpg_sd01_div_table[] = {
> +	{  0,  2 }, {  1,  3 }, {  2,  4 }, {  3,  6 },
> +	{  4,  8 },
>  	{  5, 12 }, {  6, 16 }, {  7, 18 }, {  8, 24 },
>  	{ 10, 36 }, { 11, 48 }, { 12, 10 }, {  0,  0 },

With this applied the only difference between the sdh and sd0/1 dividers 
tables would be the { 12, 10 } entry, available for sd0/1 only. Given that the 
hardware does not match the documentation, could you check whether that entry 
is supported by sdh as well ? If so we could merge the two tables. Otherwise 
this patch looks good, could you please just reformat the table to avoid the 
mostly empty line in the middle ?

>  };

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart