Re: [PATCH] sh: clk: Relax clk rate match test

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Jacopo,

CC linux-clk (yes I know this is about the legacy SH clock framework, but
the public API is/should be the same)

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 12:24 PM, Jacopo Mondi
<jacopo+renesas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> When asking for a clk rate to be set, the sh core clock matches only
> exact rate values against the calculated frequency table entries. If the
> rate does not match exactly the test fails, and the whole frequency
> table is walked, resulting in selection of the last entry, corresponding to
> the lowest available clock rate.

IIUIC, the code does not select the last entry, but returns an error code,
which is propagated all the way up?

> Ie. when asking for a 10MHz clock rate on div6 clocks (ie. "video_clk" line),
> the calculated clock frequency 10088572 Hz gets ignored, and the clock is
> actually set to 5201920 Hz, which is the last available entry of the frequencies
> table.

Perhaps 5201920 is just the default (or old value)?

> Relax the clock frequency match test, allowing selection of clock rates
> immediately slower than the required one.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> ---
> Hello renesas lists,
>
> I'm now working on handling frame rate for the ov7720 image sensor to have that
> driver accepted as part of v4l2. The sensor is installed on on Migo-R board.
> In order to properly calculate pixel clock and the framerate I noticed the
> clock signal fed to the sensor from the SH7722 chip was always the lowest
> available one.
>
> This patch fixes the issues and allows me to properly select which clock
> frequency supply to the sensor, which according to datasheet does not support
> input clock frequencies slower than 10MHz (but works anyhow).
>
> As all patches for SH architecture I wonder where they should be picked up from,
> as SH seems not maintained at the moment.
>
> Thanks
>    j
>
> ---
>  drivers/sh/clk/core.c | 9 ++++++---
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/sh/clk/core.c b/drivers/sh/clk/core.c
> index 92863e3..d2cb94c 100644
> --- a/drivers/sh/clk/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/sh/clk/core.c
> @@ -198,9 +198,12 @@ int clk_rate_table_find(struct clk *clk,
>  {
>         struct cpufreq_frequency_table *pos;
>
> -       cpufreq_for_each_valid_entry(pos, freq_table)
> -               if (pos->frequency == rate)
> -                       return pos - freq_table;
> +       cpufreq_for_each_valid_entry(pos, freq_table) {
> +               if (pos->frequency > rate)
> +                       continue;

This assumes all frequency tables are sorted.

Shouldn't you pick the closest frequency?

However, that's what clk_rate_table_round() does, which is called from
sh_clk_div_round_rate(), and thus already used as .round_rate:

    static struct sh_clk_ops sh_clk_div_enable_clk_ops = {
            .recalc         = sh_clk_div_recalc,
            .set_rate       = sh_clk_div_set_rate,
            .round_rate     = sh_clk_div_round_rate,
            .enable         = sh_clk_div_enable,
            .disable        = sh_clk_div_disable,
    };

(clk_rate_table_find() is called from sh_clk_div_set_rate())

Or are you supposed to ask for the exact clock rate? Where does the 10 MHz
come from?

> +
> +               return pos - freq_table;
> +       }
>
>         return -ENOENT;
>  }

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds