lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Jun]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [PATCH 6/6] tty: serial: lpuart: add a more accurate baud rate calculation method
Date
Hi Andy,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Shevchenko [mailto:andy.shevchenko@gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2017 1:11 AM
> To: A.S. Dong
> Cc: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm
> Mailing List; Greg Kroah-Hartman; Jiri Slaby; Andy Duan; Stefan Agner;
> Mingkai Hu; Y.B. Lu
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] tty: serial: lpuart: add a more accurate baud
> rate calculation method
>
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 5:18 PM, A.S. Dong <aisheng.dong@nxp.com> wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Dong Aisheng <aisheng.dong@nxp.com>
> wrote:
>
> By some reason my previous message went privately.
> It didn't have anything major anyway and here I'm suggesting optimization
> of finding factors of the formula in use. See below.
>
> >> > + u32 sbr, osr, baud_diff, tmp_osr, tmp_sbr, tmp_diff, tmp;
> >> > + u32 clk = sport->port.uartclk;
> >> > +
> >> > + /*
> >> > + * The idea is to use the best OSR (over-sampling rate)
> possible.
> >> > + * Note, OSR is typically hard-set to 16 in other LPUART
> >> instantiations.
> >> > + * Loop to find the best OSR value possible, one that
> >> > + generates
> >> minimum
> >> > + * baud_diff iterate through the rest of the supported
> >> > + values of
> >> OSR.
> >> > + *
> >> > + * Calculation Formula:
> >> > + * Baud Rate = baud clock / ((OSR+1) × SBR)
> >> > + */
> >> > + baud_diff = baudrate;
> >> > + osr = 0;
> >> > + sbr = 0;
> >> > +
> >>
> >> > + for (tmp_osr = 4; tmp_osr <= 32; tmp_osr++) {
>
> I missed one thing, what happened by default to OSR? What is the value in
> use?
>

No valid default value. (osc/sbr are 0 by default)
If no proper osc and sbr calculated, a WARNING will show.

> >> I _think_ you may simplify this and avoid for-loop if you reconsider
> >> approach.
>
> > But there is indeed a optimization way, see below.
>
> > To optimize the looping, we probably could do:
> > If (!baud_diff)
> > Break;
>
> It's a small one, we may have more interesting approach.
>
> So, the algo is the following:
>
> Assume the ranges like this:
> OSR = [4 ... 32]
> SBR = [2 ... 8192]
>

Baud Rate = baud clock / ((OSR+1) × SBR)

In HW:
OSR range : 3 – 31
SBR range: 1 – 8191

> Then:
>
> 1. Get ratio factor as
> ratio = CLK / desired baud rate
> 2. If ratio < 8192 * 9 / 2, just use (ratio / 4, 4) as (OSR, SBR) setting.
> (Needs clarification on OSR < 4)

Sorry that I'm a bit mess here.
What is 8192 * 9 /2 meaning?

And for (ratio / 4, 4) as (OSR,SBR), take 115200 as an example:
Assuming baud clock 24Mhz.

Ratio = 24000000 / 115200 = 208
OSR = Ratio / 4 = 52
Then OSR is out of range which seems wrong.

> 3. if ratio >= 8192 * 31, just use those
> two numbers (8192, 31). You can't do anything better there.

This actually may not happen.
Even take a 9600 as example, the clk becomes:
8191 * 31 * 9600 = 2.4GHz
Which is theoretically not exist.

> 4. Otherwise, get a minimum required factor of OSR
> osr_min = ratio / 8192
> 5. Start your loop from osr_min + 1 to 31.
>
> 6 (optional). Of course you may not consider baud_diff > osr_min, it's I
> suppose obvious
>
> P.S. Note, all divisions by 2^n are just simple right shifts. Diffs are
> calculated as multiplication of OSR and SBR in comparison to ratio. One
> division so far.
>

I'm not quite understand the approach.

How about you send a separate baud algorithm improvement patch later?
Then it first can provide us a good patch history and also better to
understand for review.

Last, very appreciate for your kind and professional review.

Regards
Dong Aisheng
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-06-12 01:42    [W:0.111 / U:0.184 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site