Hi again,
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 05:18:21PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 03:15:06PM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting Maxime Ripard (2022-01-25 06:15:41)
> > > +/*
> > > + * Test that if our clock has some boundaries and we try to round a rate
> > > + * lower than the minimum, the returned rate will be within range.
> > > + */
> > > +static void clk_range_test_set_range_round_rate_lower(struct kunit *test)
> > > +{
> > > + struct clk_dummy_context *ctx = test->priv;
> > > + struct clk_hw *hw = &ctx->hw;
> > > + struct clk *clk = hw->clk;
> > > + long rate;
> > > +
> > > + KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test,
> > > + clk_set_rate_range(clk,
> > > + DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1,
> > > + DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2),
> > > + 0);
> > > +
> > > + rate = clk_round_rate(clk, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1 - 1000);
> > > + KUNIT_ASSERT_GT(test, rate, 0);
> > > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, rate, DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1);
> >
> > The comment says within range but this test says exactly the minimum
> > rate. Please change it to test that the rate is within rate 1 and rate
> > 2. Also, we should call clk_get_rate() here to make sure the rate is
> > within the boundaries and matches what clk_round_rate() returned.
>
> Ok
Actually, that doesn't work. Calling clk_round_rate() won't affect the
clock rate, so the rate returned by clk_get_rate() won't match what
clk_round_rate() will return.
Maxime
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
