Hi Tomasz,
On 8/6/20 18:11, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/clk-pll.c
>> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/clk-pll.c
>> @@ -63,6 +63,27 @@ static long samsung_pll_round_rate(struct clk_hw *hw,
>> return rate_table[i - 1].rate;
>> }
>>
>> +static int samsung_pll_lock_wait(struct samsung_clk_pll *pll,
>> + unsigned int reg_mask)
>> +{
>> + ktime_t timeout;
>> +
>> + /* Wait until the PLL is in steady locked state */
>> + timeout = ktime_add_ms(ktime_get(), PLL_TIMEOUT_MS);
>> +
>> + while (!(readl_relaxed(pll->con_reg) & reg_mask)) {
>> + if (ktime_after(ktime_get(), timeout)) {
>> + pr_err("%s: Could not lock PLL %s\n",
>> + __func__, clk_hw_get_name(&pll->hw));
>> + return -EFAULT;
>> + }
>> +
>> + cpu_relax();
>> + }
> Thanks for the patch! Good to have this consolidated. How about going
> one step further and using the generic
> readl_relaxed_poll_timeout_atomic() helper?
Might be a good suggestion, I was considering those helpers but ended
up not using them in the patch. The cpu_relax() call might also not be
really needed now, when there is the ktime code within the loop.
Having multiple occurrences of readl_relaxed_poll_timeout_atomic() could
increase the code size due to inlining. How about keeping the
samsung_pll_lock_wait() function and just changing its implementation?
--
Thanks,
Sylwester
