Message ID | 20220826142030.213805-1-quanyang.wang@windriver.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Accepted, archived |
Headers | show |
Series | clk: zynqmp: pll: rectify rate rounding in zynqmp_pll_round_rate | expand |
[AMD Official Use Only - General] Hi , Thanks for the patch. > -----Original Message----- > From: quanyang.wang@windriver.com <quanyang.wang@windriver.com> > Sent: Friday, August 26, 2022 7:51 PM > To: Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>; Stephen Boyd > <sboyd@kernel.org>; Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com> > Cc: Michael Tretter <m.tretter@pengutronix.de>; Quanyang Wang > <quanyang.wang@windriver.com>; linux-clk@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm- > kernel@lists.infradead.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Subject: [PATCH] clk: zynqmp: pll: rectify rate rounding in > zynqmp_pll_round_rate > > CAUTION: This message has originated from an External Source. Please use > proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or > responding to this email. > > > From: Quanyang Wang <quanyang.wang@windriver.com> > > The function zynqmp_pll_round_rate is used to find a most appropriate PLL > frequency which the hardware can generate according to the desired > frequency. For example, if the desired frequency is 297MHz, considering the > limited range from PS_PLL_VCO_MIN (1.5GHz) to PS_PLL_VCO_MAX (3.0GHz) > of PLL, zynqmp_pll_round_rate should return 1.872GHz (297MHz * 5). > > There are two problems with the current code of zynqmp_pll_round_rate: > > 1) When the rate is below PS_PLL_VCO_MIN, it can't find a correct rate when > the parameter "rate" is an integer multiple of *prate, in other words, if "f" is > zero, zynqmp_pll_round_rate won't return a valid frequency which is from > PS_PLL_VCO_MIN to PS_PLL_VCO_MAX. For example, *prate is 33MHz and > the rate is 660MHz, zynqmp_pll_round_rate will not boost up rate and just > return 660MHz, and this will cause clk_calc_new_rates failure since > zynqmp_pll_round_rate returns an invalid rate out of its boundaries. > > 2) Even if the rate is higher than PS_PLL_VCO_MIN, there is still a risk that > zynqmp_pll_round_rate returns an invalid rate because the function > DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST makes some loss in the fractional part. If the parent > clock *prate is 33333333Hz and we want to set the PLL rate to 1.5GHz, this > function will return 1499999985Hz by using the formula below: > value = *prate * DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(rate, *prate)). > This value is also invalid since it's slightly smaller than PS_PLL_VCO_MIN. > because DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST makes some loss in the fractional part. > > Signed-off-by: Quanyang Wang <quanyang.wang@windriver.com> Reviewed-by: Shubhrajyoti Datta <shubhrajyoti.datta@amd.com>
Quoting quanyang.wang@windriver.com (2022-08-26 07:20:30) > From: Quanyang Wang <quanyang.wang@windriver.com> > > The function zynqmp_pll_round_rate is used to find a most appropriate > PLL frequency which the hardware can generate according to the desired > frequency. For example, if the desired frequency is 297MHz, considering > the limited range from PS_PLL_VCO_MIN (1.5GHz) to PS_PLL_VCO_MAX (3.0GHz) > of PLL, zynqmp_pll_round_rate should return 1.872GHz (297MHz * 5). > > There are two problems with the current code of zynqmp_pll_round_rate: > > 1) When the rate is below PS_PLL_VCO_MIN, it can't find a correct rate > when the parameter "rate" is an integer multiple of *prate, in other words, > if "f" is zero, zynqmp_pll_round_rate won't return a valid frequency which > is from PS_PLL_VCO_MIN to PS_PLL_VCO_MAX. For example, *prate is 33MHz > and the rate is 660MHz, zynqmp_pll_round_rate will not boost up rate and > just return 660MHz, and this will cause clk_calc_new_rates failure since > zynqmp_pll_round_rate returns an invalid rate out of its boundaries. > > 2) Even if the rate is higher than PS_PLL_VCO_MIN, there is still a risk > that zynqmp_pll_round_rate returns an invalid rate because the function > DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST makes some loss in the fractional part. If the parent > clock *prate is 33333333Hz and we want to set the PLL rate to 1.5GHz, > this function will return 1499999985Hz by using the formula below: > value = *prate * DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(rate, *prate)). > This value is also invalid since it's slightly smaller than PS_PLL_VCO_MIN. > because DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST makes some loss in the fractional part. > > Signed-off-by: Quanyang Wang <quanyang.wang@windriver.com> > --- Applied to clk-next
diff --git a/drivers/clk/zynqmp/pll.c b/drivers/clk/zynqmp/pll.c index 91a6b4cc910e..0d3e1377b092 100644 --- a/drivers/clk/zynqmp/pll.c +++ b/drivers/clk/zynqmp/pll.c @@ -102,26 +102,25 @@ static long zynqmp_pll_round_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long rate, unsigned long *prate) { u32 fbdiv; - long rate_div, f; + u32 mult, div; - /* Enable the fractional mode if needed */ - rate_div = (rate * FRAC_DIV) / *prate; - f = rate_div % FRAC_DIV; - if (f) { - if (rate > PS_PLL_VCO_MAX) { - fbdiv = rate / PS_PLL_VCO_MAX; - rate = rate / (fbdiv + 1); - } - if (rate < PS_PLL_VCO_MIN) { - fbdiv = DIV_ROUND_UP(PS_PLL_VCO_MIN, rate); - rate = rate * fbdiv; - } - return rate; + /* Let rate fall inside the range PS_PLL_VCO_MIN ~ PS_PLL_VCO_MAX */ + if (rate > PS_PLL_VCO_MAX) { + div = DIV_ROUND_UP(rate, PS_PLL_VCO_MAX); + rate = rate / div; + } + if (rate < PS_PLL_VCO_MIN) { + mult = DIV_ROUND_UP(PS_PLL_VCO_MIN, rate); + rate = rate * mult; } fbdiv = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(rate, *prate); - fbdiv = clamp_t(u32, fbdiv, PLL_FBDIV_MIN, PLL_FBDIV_MAX); - return *prate * fbdiv; + if (fbdiv < PLL_FBDIV_MIN || fbdiv > PLL_FBDIV_MAX) { + fbdiv = clamp_t(u32, fbdiv, PLL_FBDIV_MIN, PLL_FBDIV_MAX); + rate = *prate * fbdiv; + } + + return rate; } /**