Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: bcm2835: Limit PCM clock to OSC and PLLD_PER
From: Phil Elwell
Date: Wed May 31 2017 - 04:28:53 EST
Hi Stefan,
On 30/05/2017 19:41, Stefan Wahren wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
>> Phil Elwell <phil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> hat am 30. Mai 2017 um 18:28 geschrieben:
>>
>>
>> Restrict clock sources for the PCM peripheral to the oscillator and
>> PLLD_PER because other source may have varying rates or be switched off.
>
>> Prevent other sources from being selected by replacing their names in
>> the list of potential parents with dummy entries (entry index is
>> significant).
>
> i like to have this as a comment above the definition of bcm2835_pcm_per_parents.
Sure - good idea.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Phil Elwell <phil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/clk/bcm/clk-bcm2835.c | 11 +++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/bcm/clk-bcm2835.c b/drivers/clk/bcm/clk-bcm2835.c
>> index 0258538..facc346 100644
>> --- a/drivers/clk/bcm/clk-bcm2835.c
>> +++ b/drivers/clk/bcm/clk-bcm2835.c
>> @@ -1511,6 +1511,16 @@ struct bcm2835_clk_desc {
>> "pllh_aux",
>> };
>>
>> +static const char *const bcm2835_pcm_per_parents[] = {
>
> As mentioned above, there should be a comment like all the others.
Yes, will do.
>> + "-",
>> + "xosc",
>> + "-",
>> + "-",
>> + "-",
>> + "-",
>> + "plld_per",
>> +};
>
> Is there a dummy entry for "pllh_aux" missing?
Yes and no - adding it will cause an extra iteration around the loop, but
perhaps it's less confusing. I'll add one.
>> +
>> #define REGISTER_PER_CLK(...) REGISTER_CLK( \
>> .num_mux_parents = ARRAY_SIZE(bcm2835_clock_per_parents), \
>> .parents = bcm2835_clock_per_parents, \
>> @@ -2000,6 +2010,7 @@ struct bcm2835_clk_desc {
>> .int_bits = 12,
>> .frac_bits = 12,
>> .is_mash_clock = true,
>> + .parents = bcm2835_pcm_per_parents,
>
> This looks a little bit hacky to me. Not sure, but can we do something like this?
>
> #define REGISTER_PCM_CLK(...) REGISTER_CLK( \
> .num_mux_parents = ARRAY_SIZE(bcm2835_pcm_per_parents), \
> .parents = bcm2835_pcm_per_parents, \
> __VA_ARGS__)
Of course - no problem.
Thanks for the feedback - it will be incorporated into V2.
Phil