Am Dienstag, 14. Januar 2020, 06:05:18 CET schrieb Stephen Boyd:
> Quoting Heiko Stuebner (2020-01-13 07:26:56)
> > diff --git a/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c b/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c
> > index 198417d56300..37378ded0993 100644
> > --- a/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c
> > +++ b/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c
> > @@ -118,12 +118,30 @@ static int rockchip_pll_wait_lock(struct rockchip_clk_pll *pll)
> > #define RK3036_PLLCON1_REFDIV_SHIFT 0
> > #define RK3036_PLLCON1_POSTDIV2_MASK 0x7
> > #define RK3036_PLLCON1_POSTDIV2_SHIFT 6
> > +#define RK3036_PLLCON1_LOCK_STATUS BIT(10)
> > #define RK3036_PLLCON1_DSMPD_MASK 0x1
> > #define RK3036_PLLCON1_DSMPD_SHIFT 12
> > +#define RK3036_PLLCON1_PWRDOWN BIT(13)
> > #define RK3036_PLLCON2_FRAC_MASK 0xffffff
> > #define RK3036_PLLCON2_FRAC_SHIFT 0
> >
> > -#define RK3036_PLLCON1_PWRDOWN (1 << 13)
> > +static int rockchip_rk3036_pll_wait_lock(struct rockchip_clk_pll *pll)
> > +{
> > + u32 pllcon;
> > + int delay = 24000000;
> > +
> > + /* poll check the lock status in rk3399 xPLLCON2 */
> > + while (delay > 0) {
> > + pllcon = readl_relaxed(pll->reg_base + RK3036_PLLCON(1));
> > + if (pllcon & RK3036_PLLCON1_LOCK_STATUS)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + delay--;
>
> There isn't any udelay here. So the timeout is just as fast as the CPU
> can churn through this? Why not use an actual time? Or use the
> readl_poll_timeout() APIs?
Done in
http://lore.kernel.org/r/20200128100204.1318450-3-heiko@xxxxxxxxx
and to keep things similar, I did a conversion to iopoll helpers for the
other variants too.
Heiko
_______________________________________________
Linux-rockchip mailing list
Linux-rockchip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip
