lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [May]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH V2 3/6] clk: qcom: clk-alpha-pll: Remove explicit CAL_L configuration for EVO PLL
From
On 26/05/2023 12:33, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>
>
> On 25.05.2023 19:21, Jagadeesh Kona wrote:
>> In lucid evo pll, the CAL_L field is part of L value register itself, and
>> the l value configuration passed from clock controller driver includes
>> CAL_L and L values as well. Hence remove explicit configuration of CAL_L
>> for evo pll.
>>
>> Fixes: 260e36606a03 ("clk: qcom: clk-alpha-pll: add Lucid EVO PLL configuration interfaces")
>> Signed-off-by: Taniya Das <quic_tdas@quicinc.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Jagadeesh Kona <quic_jkona@quicinc.com>
>> ---
> Oh that isn't obvious at first sight, nice find!
>
> I'd suggest a different solution though:
>
> #define LUCID_EVO_PLL_L_LVAL GENMASK(..
> #define LUCID_EVO_PLL_L_CAL_L GENMASK(..
>
> lval = FIELD_PREP(LUCID_EVO_PLL_L_LVAL, config->l) |
> FIELD_PREP(LUCID_EVO_PLL_L_CAL_L, config->cal_l);
>
> This would make the separation between the two parts more explicit
>
> however
>
> config->l would then represent the L value and not the end value
> written to the L register

Yes. I think there should be separate config->l and config->cal_l values
(and probably ringosc_cal_l, basing on the comment in the source).

Just a question: is camcc-sm8550 using the same PLL type or is it some
kind of subtype of lucid_evo PLL?

--
With best wishes
Dmitry

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-05-26 17:55    [W:0.085 / U:0.512 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site