lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v9 14/27] pwm: jz4740: Improve algorithm of clock calculation
Adding Stephen to the discussion.
Adding Stephen to the discussion.

On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 6:27 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> Hello Paul,
>
> On Sat, Jan 05, 2019 at 06:05:38PM -0300, Paul Cercueil wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 4:57 PM, Uwe Kleine-König
>> <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> wrote:
>> > You are assuming stuff here about the parent clk which isn't
>> guaranteed
>> > (AFAICT) by the clk framework: If you call clk_round_rate(clk,
>> rate - 1)
>> > this might well return rate even if the clock could run slower
>> than
>> > rate.
>>
>> It may not be guaranteed by the clock framework itself, but it is
>> guaranteed
>> to behave like that on this family of SoCs.
>
> You shouldn't rely on that. Experience shows that people will start
> copying code to machines where this is not guaranteed. Even if they
> don't copy and only learn from reading this is bad. Also how do you
> guarantee that this won't change in the future making the pwm code
> break
> without noticing?
>
> If you use an API better don't assume more things given than are
> guaranteed by the API.
>
> Having said that I would consider it sensible to introduce something
> like clk_roundup_rate() and clk_rounddown_rate() which would allow
> calculations like that.

@Stephen:
Some context: my algorithm makes use of clk_round_rate(clk, rate - 1)
to get the
next (smaller) clock rate that a clock support.

Is it something safe to assume? If not is there a better way?

>> > Wouldn't it make sense to start iterating with rate = 0xffff *
>> 1e9 /
>> > period? Otherwise you get bad configurations if rate is
>> considerable
>> > slower than necessary.
>>
>> The algorithm will start with 'rate' being the parent clock's rate,
>> which
>> will always be the highest rate that the child clock will support.
>
> Ah right, I missed that bit.

Thanks,
-Paul

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-10 15:06    [from the cache]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and my Meterkast|Read the blog