Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: bcm2835: Support for clock parent selection
From: Eric Anholt
Date: Mon Nov 09 2015 - 11:38:59 EST
Remi Pommarel <repk@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 06:03:31PM -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
>> It looks like you've dropped the use of the divisor off of the PLL
>> channel when setting a rate. That seems bad for all the other clocks in
>> the system, and a feature we couldn't lose.
> Sorry, but I'm not sure to understand your point here. Are you afraid
> that clocks such as PWM, H264, etc, have lost the ability to divide the
> rate from the PLL or oscillator clock they cosume as source ?
> If so, I think it's ok. If I'm not wrong here, clk_set_rate() first
> calls clk->determinate_rate() then calls clk->set_rate(). This patch
> makes bcm2835_clock_determine_source() to only select the parent to use
> and does not set the clock's rate itself. The clock's rate is set later
> on when bcm2835_clock_set_parent() is called.
> bcm2835_clock_set_parent() still divides the parent rate so we are not
> loosing this feature here.
I see. You're leaving req->rate as-is, so that it gets passed back in
on the set_rate() call. Since you've chosen only a parent with a
rate greater than ours, we know we'll be able to divide into it.
This has the downside that anything using the min/max rate clamping
doesn't get to know before setting that we might be out of bounds.
> It would probably be better to have bcm2835_clock_determine_source()
> selects the parent by choosing the one that provides the rate which,
> after being divided, generates the highest but lower rate out of the
> PWM clock itself.
> Moreover, if you agree with the above modification I see no reason to
> not call it "bcm2835_clock_determine_rate"
This sounds like what the function should be doing.
Description: PGP signature