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-spi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html