On 07/08/2016 06:17 PM, Michael Turquette wrote:
> Quoting Andi Shyti (2016-07-08 07:46:40)
>> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c b/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c
>> index 6da663f..32b66f0 100644
>> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c
>> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c
>> @@ -639,6 +639,7 @@ static void s3c64xx_spi_config(struct s3c64xx_spi_driver_data *sdd)
>> writel(val, regs + S3C64XX_SPI_MODE_CFG);
>>
>> if (sdd->port_conf->clk_from_cmu) {
>> + /* There is half-multiplier before the SPI */
>> clk_set_rate(sdd->src_clk, sdd->cur_speed * 2);
>
> Just a small comment, but if the fixed-factor divide-by-two clock was
> modeled in Linux, then this driver could call clk_set_rate on that clock
> with the "correct" rate.
>
> I guess that this driver would be the provider of that clock?
Good point, however I'm not sure if it is worth to model this divider
with a clk object. It is an internal divider and the clock it provides
is only used internally within the SPI controller. Thus the spi-s3c64xx
driver would be provider on the only consumer of this clock.
Additionally, the "There is half-multiplier before the SPI" comment
seems to be obfuscating how the hardware really looks like to me.
It talks about multiplier (which reminds me of PLLs with a divider
in the feedback loop) while there is a simple divider which should
be considered as an integral part of the controller IP block.
While we are at it, I'd propose to change this comment to something
like:
/* The SCLK_SPI clock is divided internally by 2 */
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
