Re: [PATCH 2/2] clk: rockchip: fix incorrect parent for rk3399's {c,g}pll_aclk_perihp_src

From: Doug Anderson
Date: Mon May 16 2016 - 11:49:14 EST


Hi,

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 8:36 PM, Xing Zheng <zhengxing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Doug,
>
>
> On 2016å05æ14æ 04:10, Doug Anderson wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Brian Norris <briannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Xing Zheng <zhengxing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> There was a typo, swapping 'c' <--> 'g'.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Xing Zheng <zhengxing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3399.c | 4 ++--
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3399.c
>>> b/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3399.c
>>> index 145756c4f3c8..9f86bfef70f7 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3399.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3399.c
>>> @@ -832,9 +832,9 @@ static struct rockchip_clk_branch
>>> rk3399_clk_branches[] __initdata = {
>>> RK3399_CLKGATE_CON(13), 1, GFLAGS),
>>>
>>> /* perihp */
>>> - GATE(0, "cpll_aclk_perihp_src", "gpll", CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED,
>>> + GATE(0, "cpll_aclk_perihp_src", "cpll", CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED,
>>> RK3399_CLKGATE_CON(5), 0, GFLAGS),
>>> - GATE(0, "gpll_aclk_perihp_src", "cpll", CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED,
>>> + GATE(0, "gpll_aclk_perihp_src", "gpll", CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED,
>>> RK3399_CLKGATE_CON(5), 1, GFLAGS),
>>> COMPOSITE(ACLK_PERIHP, "aclk_perihp", mux_aclk_perihp_p,
>>> CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED,
>>> RK3399_CLKSEL_CON(14), 7, 1, MFLAGS, 0, 5,
>>> DFLAGS,
>>
>> Definitely there was a bug since this table itself was inconsistent.
>> ...and I _think_ this fix is correct, but I'll note that the TRM has
>> more inconsistency here.
>>
>> In the big clock table 'CRU Clock Architecture Diagram', I see:
>> CLK 4 is CPLL
>> CLK 5 is GPLL
>> CLK 125 is aclk_perihp_cpll_src and has 4 (CPLL) as source, with
>> g5[0] as the bit
>> CLK 126 is aclk_perihp_gpll_src and has 5 (GPLL) as source, with
>> g5[1] as the bit
>>
>> In the definition of CRU_CLKGATE_CON5:
>> bit 0 shows aclk_perihp_gpll_src_en
>> bit 1 shows aclk_perihp_cpll_src_en
>>
>>
>> Thus the table shows CPLL as gate5[0] and GPLL as gate5[1]. The
>> register definition shows the opposite. I'll tend to believe the
>> table over the register definition, but I figured I'd bring it up
>> anyway.
>>
>>
>> Xing Zheng: can you confirm that the table is correct and ask
>> documentation folks to fix the register definition for
>> CRU_CLKGATE_CON5?
>
> Yes, previously, our IC & DOC partner confirmed that the definition of
> CRU_CLKGATE_CON5 should be:
> bit 0 shows aclk_perihp_cpll_src_en
> bit 1 shows aclk_perihp_gpll_src_en
>
> Sorry to the incorrect register definition, we will fix them and review the
> TRM again.

Great!

Since we now have extra confirmation that Brian's patch is indeed correct:

Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>