pll14xx_calc_rate() output the fout clock not the fvco clock
The relation of fvco and fout is:
fout = fvco / (1 << sdiv)
So use correct naming for the clock.
Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang <[email protected]>
---
drivers/clk/imx/clk-pll14xx.c | 23 ++++++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/clk/imx/clk-pll14xx.c b/drivers/clk/imx/clk-pll14xx.c
index 0d58d85c375e..d63564dbb12c 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/imx/clk-pll14xx.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/imx/clk-pll14xx.c
@@ -104,15 +104,15 @@ static const struct imx_pll14xx_rate_table *imx_get_pll_settings(
static long pll14xx_calc_rate(struct clk_pll14xx *pll, int mdiv, int pdiv,
int sdiv, int kdiv, unsigned long prate)
{
- u64 fvco = prate;
+ u64 fout = prate;
- /* fvco = (m * 65536 + k) * Fin / (p * 65536) */
- fvco *= (mdiv * 65536 + kdiv);
+ /* fout = (m * 65536 + k) * Fin / (p * 65536) / (1 << sdiv) */
+ fout *= (mdiv * 65536 + kdiv);
pdiv *= 65536;
- do_div(fvco, pdiv << sdiv);
+ do_div(fout, pdiv << sdiv);
- return fvco;
+ return fout;
}
static long pll1443x_calc_kdiv(int mdiv, int pdiv, int sdiv,
@@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ static void imx_pll14xx_calc_settings(struct clk_pll14xx *pll, unsigned long rat
{
u32 pll_div_ctl0, pll_div_ctl1;
int mdiv, pdiv, sdiv, kdiv;
- long fvco, rate_min, rate_max, dist, best = LONG_MAX;
+ long fout, rate_min, rate_max, dist, best = LONG_MAX;
const struct imx_pll14xx_rate_table *tt;
/*
@@ -143,6 +143,7 @@ static void imx_pll14xx_calc_settings(struct clk_pll14xx *pll, unsigned long rat
* d) -32768 <= k <= 32767
*
* fvco = (m * 65536 + k) * prate / (p * 65536)
+ * fout = (m * 65536 + k) * prate / (p * 65536) / (1 << sdiv)
*/
/* First try if we can get the desired rate from one of the static entries */
@@ -173,8 +174,8 @@ static void imx_pll14xx_calc_settings(struct clk_pll14xx *pll, unsigned long rat
pr_debug("%s: in=%ld, want=%ld Only adjust kdiv %ld -> %d\n",
clk_hw_get_name(&pll->hw), prate, rate,
FIELD_GET(KDIV_MASK, pll_div_ctl1), kdiv);
- fvco = pll14xx_calc_rate(pll, mdiv, pdiv, sdiv, kdiv, prate);
- t->rate = (unsigned int)fvco;
+ fout = pll14xx_calc_rate(pll, mdiv, pdiv, sdiv, kdiv, prate);
+ t->rate = (unsigned int)fout;
t->mdiv = mdiv;
t->pdiv = pdiv;
t->sdiv = sdiv;
@@ -190,13 +191,13 @@ static void imx_pll14xx_calc_settings(struct clk_pll14xx *pll, unsigned long rat
mdiv = clamp(mdiv, 64, 1023);
kdiv = pll1443x_calc_kdiv(mdiv, pdiv, sdiv, rate, prate);
- fvco = pll14xx_calc_rate(pll, mdiv, pdiv, sdiv, kdiv, prate);
+ fout = pll14xx_calc_rate(pll, mdiv, pdiv, sdiv, kdiv, prate);
/* best match */
- dist = abs((long)rate - (long)fvco);
+ dist = abs((long)rate - (long)fout);
if (dist < best) {
best = dist;
- t->rate = (unsigned int)fvco;
+ t->rate = (unsigned int)fout;
t->mdiv = mdiv;
t->pdiv = pdiv;
t->sdiv = sdiv;
--
2.34.1
Hi,
thanks for the patch.
On 23-12-20, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
> pll14xx_calc_rate() output the fout clock not the fvco clock
> The relation of fvco and fout is:
> fout = fvco / (1 << sdiv)
>
> So use correct naming for the clock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang <[email protected]>
lgtm
Reviewed-by: Marco Felsch <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/clk/imx/clk-pll14xx.c | 23 ++++++++++++-----------
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/imx/clk-pll14xx.c b/drivers/clk/imx/clk-pll14xx.c
> index 0d58d85c375e..d63564dbb12c 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/imx/clk-pll14xx.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/imx/clk-pll14xx.c
> @@ -104,15 +104,15 @@ static const struct imx_pll14xx_rate_table *imx_get_pll_settings(
> static long pll14xx_calc_rate(struct clk_pll14xx *pll, int mdiv, int pdiv,
> int sdiv, int kdiv, unsigned long prate)
> {
> - u64 fvco = prate;
> + u64 fout = prate;
>
> - /* fvco = (m * 65536 + k) * Fin / (p * 65536) */
> - fvco *= (mdiv * 65536 + kdiv);
> + /* fout = (m * 65536 + k) * Fin / (p * 65536) / (1 << sdiv) */
> + fout *= (mdiv * 65536 + kdiv);
> pdiv *= 65536;
>
> - do_div(fvco, pdiv << sdiv);
> + do_div(fout, pdiv << sdiv);
>
> - return fvco;
> + return fout;
> }
>
> static long pll1443x_calc_kdiv(int mdiv, int pdiv, int sdiv,
> @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ static void imx_pll14xx_calc_settings(struct clk_pll14xx *pll, unsigned long rat
> {
> u32 pll_div_ctl0, pll_div_ctl1;
> int mdiv, pdiv, sdiv, kdiv;
> - long fvco, rate_min, rate_max, dist, best = LONG_MAX;
> + long fout, rate_min, rate_max, dist, best = LONG_MAX;
> const struct imx_pll14xx_rate_table *tt;
>
> /*
> @@ -143,6 +143,7 @@ static void imx_pll14xx_calc_settings(struct clk_pll14xx *pll, unsigned long rat
> * d) -32768 <= k <= 32767
> *
> * fvco = (m * 65536 + k) * prate / (p * 65536)
> + * fout = (m * 65536 + k) * prate / (p * 65536) / (1 << sdiv)
> */
>
> /* First try if we can get the desired rate from one of the static entries */
> @@ -173,8 +174,8 @@ static void imx_pll14xx_calc_settings(struct clk_pll14xx *pll, unsigned long rat
> pr_debug("%s: in=%ld, want=%ld Only adjust kdiv %ld -> %d\n",
> clk_hw_get_name(&pll->hw), prate, rate,
> FIELD_GET(KDIV_MASK, pll_div_ctl1), kdiv);
> - fvco = pll14xx_calc_rate(pll, mdiv, pdiv, sdiv, kdiv, prate);
> - t->rate = (unsigned int)fvco;
> + fout = pll14xx_calc_rate(pll, mdiv, pdiv, sdiv, kdiv, prate);
> + t->rate = (unsigned int)fout;
> t->mdiv = mdiv;
> t->pdiv = pdiv;
> t->sdiv = sdiv;
> @@ -190,13 +191,13 @@ static void imx_pll14xx_calc_settings(struct clk_pll14xx *pll, unsigned long rat
> mdiv = clamp(mdiv, 64, 1023);
>
> kdiv = pll1443x_calc_kdiv(mdiv, pdiv, sdiv, rate, prate);
> - fvco = pll14xx_calc_rate(pll, mdiv, pdiv, sdiv, kdiv, prate);
> + fout = pll14xx_calc_rate(pll, mdiv, pdiv, sdiv, kdiv, prate);
>
> /* best match */
> - dist = abs((long)rate - (long)fvco);
> + dist = abs((long)rate - (long)fout);
> if (dist < best) {
> best = dist;
> - t->rate = (unsigned int)fvco;
> + t->rate = (unsigned int)fout;
> t->mdiv = mdiv;
> t->pdiv = pdiv;
> t->sdiv = sdiv;
> --
> 2.34.1
>
>
>
> Subject: [PATCH] clk: imx: pll14xx: change naming of fvco to fout
>
> pll14xx_calc_rate() output the fout clock not the fvco clock The relation of
> fvco and fout is:
> fout = fvco / (1 << sdiv)
>
> So use correct naming for the clock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Peng Fan <[email protected]>
On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 18:33:09 +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
> pll14xx_calc_rate() output the fout clock not the fvco clock
> The relation of fvco and fout is:
> fout = fvco / (1 << sdiv)
>
> So use correct naming for the clock.
>
>
> [...]
Applied, thanks!
[1/1] clk: imx: pll14xx: change naming of fvco to fout
commit: f52f00069888e410cec718792b3e314624f209ea
Best regards,
--
Abel Vesa <[email protected]>