On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:52:42PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
> The PLLs on newer Allwinner SoC's, such as the A31 and A23, have a
> N multiplier factor that starts from 1, not 0.
>
> This patch adds an option to the clock driver's config data structures
> to define the difference.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@xxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-factors.c | 5 ++++-
> drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-factors.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-factors.c b/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-factors.c
> index 3806d97..399cf4d 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-factors.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-factors.c
> @@ -62,7 +62,10 @@ static unsigned long clk_factors_recalc_rate(struct clk_hw *hw,
> p = FACTOR_GET(config->pshift, config->pwidth, reg);
>
> /* Calculate the rate */
> - rate = (parent_rate * n * (k + 1) >> p) / (m + 1);
> + if (config->n_from_one)
> + rate = (parent_rate * (n + 1) * (k + 1) >> p) / (m + 1);
> + else
> + rate = (parent_rate * n * (k + 1) >> p) / (m + 1);
Thinking a bit more about this, I wonder wether it wouldn't be better
to just have a n_start variable or something, and just use (n +
n_start) instead.
That would avoid having to declare twice the same function.
Maxime
>
> return rate;
> }
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-factors.h b/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-factors.h
> index 02e1a43..0484a48 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-factors.h
> +++ b/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-factors.h
> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ struct clk_factors_config {
> u8 mwidth;
> u8 pshift;
> u8 pwidth;
> + u8 n_from_one;
Especially when you declare it as an u8, and not a bool.
Maxime
--
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
