Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 4 Aug 2023 11:39:51 +0200
From:   Uwe =?utf-8?Q?Kleine-K=C3=B6nig?= <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
To:     =?utf-8?B?0JDQu9C10LrRgdCw0L3QtNGAINCo0YPQsdC40L0=?= 
        <privatesub2@gmail.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
        Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org>,
        Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>,
        Samuel Holland <samuel@sholland.org>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>,
        Cristian Ciocaltea <cristian.ciocaltea@collabora.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev,
        linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] pwm: Add Allwinner's D1/T113-S3/R329 SoCs PWM
 support
Message-ID: <20230804093951.rsjuz5itn62ltqy5@pengutronix.de>
References: <20230627082334.1253020-1-privatesub2@gmail.com>
 <20230627082334.1253020-3-privatesub2@gmail.com>
 <20230710091413.fdl7j6eb3ln7uj4g@pengutronix.de>
 <CAF4idNmUn3G0=MU+PxTMNVb7u0xmQX4i5Z3zO6azUDBb1BezfQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="rc7sp6r7dmnv5adg"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAF4idNmUn3G0=MU+PxTMNVb7u0xmQX4i5Z3zO6azUDBb1BezfQ@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk


--rc7sp6r7dmnv5adg
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello,

On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 10:19:26AM +0300, =D0=90=D0=BB=D0=B5=D0=BA=D1=81=D0=
=B0=D0=BD=D0=B4=D1=80 =D0=A8=D1=83=D0=B1=D0=B8=D0=BD wrote:
> =D0=BF=D0=BD, 10 =D0=B8=D1=8E=D0=BB. 2023=E2=80=AF=D0=B3. =D0=B2 12:14, U=
we Kleine-K=C3=B6nig <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>:
> > On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 11:23:25AM +0300, Aleksandr Shubin wrote:
> > > Allwinner's D1, T113-S3 and R329 SoCs have a quite different PWM
> > > controllers with ones supported by pwm-sun4i driver.
> > >
> > > This patch adds a PWM controller driver for Allwinner's D1,
> > > T113-S3 and R329 SoCs. The main difference between these SoCs
> > > is the number of channels defined by the DT property.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Aleksandr Shubin <privatesub2@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/pwm/Kconfig      |  10 ++
> > >  drivers/pwm/Makefile     |   1 +
> > >  drivers/pwm/pwm-sun20i.c | 322 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
++
> > >  3 files changed, 333 insertions(+)
> > >  create mode 100644 drivers/pwm/pwm-sun20i.c
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> > > index 8df861b1f4a3..05c48a36969e 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> > > +++ b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> > > @@ -594,6 +594,16 @@ config PWM_SUN4I
> > >         To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module
> > >         will be called pwm-sun4i.
> > >
> > > +config PWM_SUN20I
> > > +     tristate "Allwinner D1/T113s/R329 PWM support"
> > > +     depends on ARCH_SUNXI || COMPILE_TEST
> > > +     depends on COMMON_CLK
> > > +     help
> > > +       Generic PWM framework driver for Allwinner D1/T113s/R329 SoCs.
> > > +
> > > +       To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module
> > > +       will be called pwm-sun20i.
> > > +
> > >  config PWM_SUNPLUS
> > >       tristate "Sunplus PWM support"
> > >       depends on ARCH_SUNPLUS || COMPILE_TEST
> > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Makefile b/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> > > index 19899b912e00..cea872e22c78 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> > > +++ b/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> > > @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_STM32)             +=3D pwm-stm32.o
> > >  obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_STM32_LP)   +=3D pwm-stm32-lp.o
> > >  obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_STMPE)              +=3D pwm-stmpe.o
> > >  obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_SUN4I)              +=3D pwm-sun4i.o
> > > +obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_SUN20I)     +=3D pwm-sun20i.o
> > >  obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_SUNPLUS)    +=3D pwm-sunplus.o
> > >  obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_TEGRA)              +=3D pwm-tegra.o
> > >  obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_TIECAP)     +=3D pwm-tiecap.o
> > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun20i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun20i.c
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 000000000000..63e9c64e0e18
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun20i.c
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,322 @@
> > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > > +/*
> > > + * PWM Controller Driver for sunxi platforms (D1, T113-S3 and R329)
> > > + *
> > > + * Limitations:
> > > + * - When the parameters change, current running period will not be =
completed
> > > + *   and run new settings immediately.
> > > + * - It output HIGH-Z state when PWM channel disabled.
> > > + *
> > > + * Copyright (c) 2023 Aleksandr Shubin <privatesub2@gmail.com>
> > > + */
> > > +
> > > +#include <linux/bitfield.h>
> > > +#include <linux/clk.h>
> > > +#include <linux/err.h>
> > > +#include <linux/io.h>
> > > +#include <linux/module.h>
> > > +#include <linux/of_device.h>
> > > +#include <linux/pwm.h>
> > > +#include <linux/reset.h>
> > > +
> > > +#define PWM_CLK_CFG_REG(chan)                (0x20 + (((chan) >> 1) =
* 0x4))
> > > +#define PWM_CLK_SRC                  GENMASK(8, 7)
> > > +#define PWM_CLK_DIV_M                        GENMASK(3, 0)
> > > +
> > > +#define PWM_CLK_GATE_REG             0x40
> > > +#define PWM_CLK_BYPASS(chan)         BIT((chan) - 16)
> > > +#define PWM_CLK_GATING(chan)         BIT(chan)
> > > +
> > > +#define PWM_ENABLE_REG                       0x80
> > > +#define PWM_EN(chan)                 BIT(chan)
> > > +
> > > +#define PWM_CTL_REG(chan)            (0x100 + (chan) * 0x20)
> > > +#define PWM_ACT_STA                  BIT(8)
> > > +#define PWM_PRESCAL_K                        GENMASK(7, 0)
> > > +
> > > +#define PWM_PERIOD_REG(chan)         (0x104 + (chan) * 0x20)
> > > +#define PWM_ENTIRE_CYCLE             GENMASK(31, 16)
> > > +#define PWM_ACT_CYCLE                        GENMASK(15, 0)
> >
> > Can you please adapt the register field names to include the register
> > name? I'd use:
> >
> > #define PWM_CTL(chan)           (0x100 + (chan) * 0x20)
> > #define PWM_CTL_ACT_STA                 BIT(8)
> > #define PWM_CTL_PRESCAL_K               GENMASK(7, 0)
> >
> > then you get a chance to spot when PWM_CLK_BYPASS(x) is written to
> > PWM_CLK_CFG.
> >
> >
> > > +struct sun20i_pwm_chip {
> > > +     struct pwm_chip chip;
> > > +     struct clk *clk_bus, *clk_hosc;
> > > +     struct reset_control *rst;
> > > +     void __iomem *base;
> > > +     /* Mutex to protect pwm apply state */
> > > +     struct mutex mutex;
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static inline struct sun20i_pwm_chip *to_sun20i_pwm_chip(struct pwm_=
chip *chip)
> > > +{
> > > +     return container_of(chip, struct sun20i_pwm_chip, chip);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static inline u32 sun20i_pwm_readl(struct sun20i_pwm_chip *chip,
> > > +                                unsigned long offset)
> > > +{
> > > +     return readl(chip->base + offset);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static inline void sun20i_pwm_writel(struct sun20i_pwm_chip *chip,
> > > +                                  u32 val, unsigned long offset)
> > > +{
> > > +     writel(val, chip->base + offset);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static int sun20i_pwm_get_state(struct pwm_chip *chip,
> > > +                             struct pwm_device *pwm,
> > > +                             struct pwm_state *state)
> > > +{
> > > +     struct sun20i_pwm_chip *sun20i_chip =3D to_sun20i_pwm_chip(chip=
);
> > > +     u64 clk_rate, tmp;
> > > +     u32 val;
> > > +     u16 ent_cycle, act_cycle;
> > > +     u8 prescal, div_id;
> > > +
> > > +     mutex_lock(&sun20i_chip->mutex);
> > > +
> > > +     val =3D sun20i_pwm_readl(sun20i_chip, PWM_CLK_CFG_REG(pwm->hwpw=
m));
> > > +     div_id =3D FIELD_GET(PWM_CLK_DIV_M, val);
> > > +     if (FIELD_GET(PWM_CLK_SRC, val) =3D=3D 0)
> > > +             clk_rate =3D clk_get_rate(sun20i_chip->clk_hosc);
> > > +     else
> > > +             clk_rate =3D clk_get_rate(sun20i_chip->clk_bus);
> > > +
> > > +     val =3D sun20i_pwm_readl(sun20i_chip, PWM_CTL_REG(pwm->hwpwm));
> > > +     state->polarity =3D (PWM_ACT_STA & val) ? PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL :=
 PWM_POLARITY_INVERSED;
> > > +
> > > +     prescal =3D FIELD_GET(PWM_PRESCAL_K, val) + 1;
> >
> > If PWM_PRESCAL_K is 0xff, prescal ends up being 0. This isn't right, is
> > it?
> >
> > > +     val =3D sun20i_pwm_readl(sun20i_chip, PWM_ENABLE_REG);
> > > +     state->enabled =3D (PWM_EN(pwm->hwpwm) & val) ? true : false;
> > > +
> > > +     val =3D sun20i_pwm_readl(sun20i_chip, PWM_PERIOD_REG(pwm->hwpwm=
));
> > > +     act_cycle =3D FIELD_GET(PWM_ACT_CYCLE, val);
> > > +     ent_cycle =3D FIELD_GET(PWM_ENTIRE_CYCLE, val);
> > > +     if (act_cycle > ent_cycle)
> > > +             act_cycle =3D ent_cycle;
> > > +
> >
> > A comment that with the width of the used factors this cannot overflow
> > would be nice here.
> >
> > > +     tmp =3D (u64)(act_cycle) * prescal * (1U << div_id) * NSEC_PER_=
SEC;
> >
> > Can be simplified to:
> >
> >         tmp =3D (u64)act_cycle * prescal << div_id * NSEC_PER_SEC;
> >
> > > +     state->duty_cycle =3D DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(tmp, clk_rate);
> > > +     tmp =3D (u64)(ent_cycle) * prescal * (1U << div_id) * NSEC_PER_=
SEC;
> > > +     state->period =3D DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(tmp, clk_rate);
> > > +     mutex_unlock(&sun20i_chip->mutex);
> > > +
> > > +     return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static int sun20i_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device=
 *pwm,
> > > +                         const struct pwm_state *state)
> > > +{
> > > +     int ret =3D 0;
> > > +     u32 clk_gate, clk_cfg, pwm_en, ctl, period;
> > > +     u64 bus_rate, hosc_rate, clk_div, val;
> > > +     u16 prescaler, div_m;
> > > +     bool use_bus_clk, calc_div_m;
> > > +     struct sun20i_pwm_chip *sun20i_chip =3D to_sun20i_pwm_chip(chip=
);
> > > +
> > > +     mutex_lock(&sun20i_chip->mutex);
> > > +
> > > +     pwm_en =3D sun20i_pwm_readl(sun20i_chip, PWM_ENABLE_REG);
> > > +
> > > +     if (state->enabled !=3D pwm->state.enabled)
> > > +             clk_gate =3D sun20i_pwm_readl(sun20i_chip, PWM_CLK_GATE=
_REG);
> > > +
> > > +     if (state->enabled !=3D pwm->state.enabled && !state->enabled) {
> > > +             clk_gate &=3D ~PWM_CLK_GATING(pwm->hwpwm);
> > > +             pwm_en &=3D ~PWM_EN(pwm->hwpwm);
> > > +             sun20i_pwm_writel(sun20i_chip, pwm_en, PWM_ENABLE_REG);
> > > +             sun20i_pwm_writel(sun20i_chip, clk_gate, PWM_CLK_GATE_R=
EG);
> > > +     }
> > > +
> > > +     if (state->polarity !=3D pwm->state.polarity ||
> > > +         state->duty_cycle !=3D pwm->state.duty_cycle ||
> > > +         state->period !=3D pwm->state.period) {
> > > +             ctl =3D sun20i_pwm_readl(sun20i_chip, PWM_CTL_REG(pwm->=
hwpwm));
> > > +             clk_cfg =3D sun20i_pwm_readl(sun20i_chip, PWM_CLK_CFG_R=
EG(pwm->hwpwm));
> > > +             hosc_rate =3D clk_get_rate(sun20i_chip->clk_hosc);
> > > +             bus_rate =3D clk_get_rate(sun20i_chip->clk_bus);
> > > +             if (pwm_en & PWM_EN(pwm->hwpwm ^ 1)) {
> > > +                     /* if the neighbor channel is enable, check per=
iod only */
> > > +                     use_bus_clk =3D FIELD_GET(PWM_CLK_SRC, clk_cfg)=
 !=3D 0;
> > > +                     if (use_bus_clk)
> > > +                             val =3D state->period * bus_rate;
> > > +                     else
> > > +                             val =3D state->period * hosc_rate;
> > > +                     do_div(val, NSEC_PER_SEC);
> > > +
> > > +                     div_m =3D FIELD_GET(PWM_CLK_DIV_M, clk_cfg);
> > > +                     calc_div_m =3D false;
> > > +             } else {
> > > +                     /* check period and select clock source */
> > > +                     use_bus_clk =3D false;
> > > +                     val =3D state->period * hosc_rate;
> > > +                     do_div(val, NSEC_PER_SEC);
> > > +                     if (val <=3D 1) {
> > > +                             use_bus_clk =3D true;
> > > +                             val =3D state->period * bus_rate;
> > > +                             do_div(val, NSEC_PER_SEC);
> > > +                             if (val <=3D 1) {
> > > +                                     ret =3D -EINVAL;
> > > +                                     goto unlock_mutex;
> > > +                             }
> > > +                     }
> > > +                     div_m =3D 0;
> > > +                     calc_div_m =3D true;
> > > +
> > > +                     /* set up the CLK_DIV_M and clock CLK_SRC */
> > > +                     clk_cfg =3D FIELD_PREP(PWM_CLK_DIV_M, div_m);
> > > +                     clk_cfg |=3D FIELD_PREP(PWM_CLK_SRC, use_bus_cl=
k ? 1 : 0);
> > > +
> > > +                     sun20i_pwm_writel(sun20i_chip, clk_cfg, PWM_CLK=
_CFG_REG(pwm->hwpwm));
> > > +             }
> > > +
> > > +             /* calculate prescaler, M factor, PWM entire cycle */
> > > +             clk_div =3D val;
> >
> > This assignment is useless as it is overwritten in the loop below, isn't
> > it?
> >
> > > +             for (prescaler =3D 0;; prescaler++) {
> > > +                     if (prescaler >=3D 256) {
> > > +                             if (calc_div_m) {
> > > +                                     prescaler =3D 0;
> > > +                                     div_m++;
> > > +                                     if (div_m >=3D 9) {
> > > +                                             ret =3D -EINVAL;
> > > +                                             goto unlock_mutex;
> > > +                                     }
> > > +                             } else {
> > > +                                     ret =3D -EINVAL;
> > > +                                     goto unlock_mutex;
> > > +                             }
> > > +                     }
> > > +
> > > +                     clk_div =3D val >> div_m;
> > > +                     do_div(clk_div, prescaler + 1);
> > > +                     if (clk_div <=3D 65534)
> > > +                             break;
> >
> > This can be calculated without a loop.
>=20
> Point me please where can I see the calculation of two divisors without a=
 loop?

for a given value of div_m you search the smallest prescaler such that

	(val >> div_m) // (prescaler + 1) =E2=89=A4 65534

(Using Python syntax where // denotes the usual
round-down-to-next-integer division and / normal exact division.)

This is equivalent to:

	  (val >> div_m) // (prescaler + 1) =E2=89=A4 65534
	=E2=9F=BA (val >> div_m) =E2=89=A4 65534 * (prescaler + 1) + prescaler
	=E2=9F=BA (val >> div_m) =E2=89=A4 65535 * prescaler + 65534
=E2=9F=BA (val >> div_m) - 65534 =E2=89=A4 65535 * prescaler
	=E2=9F=BA ((val >> div_m) - 65534) / 65535 =E2=89=A4 prescaler

And as prescaler is integer, this is

	  ...
	=E2=9F=BA ((val >> div_m) - 65534) // 65535 =E2=89=A4 prescaler

So the prescaler value you're looking for is:

	 ((val >> div_m) - 65534) // 65535

And then you have to pick the smallest div_m such that prescaler =E2=89=A4 =
255:

	  ((val >> div_m) - 65534) // 65535 =E2=89=A4 255
	=E2=9F=BA (val >> div_m) - 65534 =E2=89=A4 255 * 65535 + 65534
	=E2=9F=BA val >> div_m =E2=89=A4 255 * 65535 + 2 * 65534
	=E2=9F=BA val >> div_m =E2=89=A4 16842493
	=E2=9F=BA val >> div_m < 16842494

so div_m is fls((val) / 16842494).

You might want to double check this and explain the algorithm in a
comment similar to the above calculation.

> > > +             }
> > > +
> > > +             period =3D FIELD_PREP(PWM_ENTIRE_CYCLE, clk_div);
> > > +
> > > +             /* set duty cycle */
> > > +             if (use_bus_clk)
> > > +                     val =3D state->duty_cycle * bus_rate;
> > > +             else
> > > +                     val =3D state->duty_cycle * hosc_rate;

maybe better use:

	if (use_bus_clk)
		rate =3D bus_rate;
	else
		rate =3D hosc_rate;

	val =3D state->duty_cycle * rate

> > > +             do_div(val, NSEC_PER_SEC);
> > > +             clk_div =3D val >> div_m;
> > > +             do_div(clk_div, prescaler + 1);
> > > +
> > > +             if (state->duty_cycle =3D=3D state->period)
> > > +                     clk_div++;
> >
> > I don't understand that one. Can you explain that in a comment please?
>=20
> The formula of the output period and the duty-cycle for PWM are as follow=
s.
> T period =3D (PWM01_CLK / PWM0_PRESCALE_K)^-1 * (PPR0.PWM_ENTIRE_CYCLE + =
1)

That can be simpler written as:

	Tperiod =3D PWM0_PRESCALE_K / PWM01_CLK * (PPR0.PWM_ENTIRE_CYCLE + 1)

right?

> T high-level =3D (PWM01_CLK / PWM0_PRESCALE_K)^-1 * PPR0.PWM_ACT_CYCLE

simlar:

	Thigh =3D PWM0_PRESCALE_K / PWM01_CLK * PPR0.PWM_ACT_CYCLE

> Duty-cycle =3D T high-level / T period
> In accordance with this formula, in order to set the duty-cycle to 100%,
> it is necessary that PWM_ACT_CYCLE >=3D PWM_ENTIRE_CYCLE + 1

The +1 is also relevant for duty_cycles other than state->period, right?

> > > +             period |=3D FIELD_PREP(PWM_ACT_CYCLE, clk_div);
> > > +             sun20i_pwm_writel(sun20i_chip, period, PWM_PERIOD_REG(p=
wm->hwpwm));
> > > +
> > > +             ctl =3D FIELD_PREP(PWM_PRESCAL_K, prescaler);
> > > +             if (state->polarity =3D=3D PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL)
> > > +                     ctl |=3D PWM_ACT_STA;
> > > +
> > > +             sun20i_pwm_writel(sun20i_chip, ctl, PWM_CTL_REG(pwm->hw=
pwm));
> >
> > Is this racy? I.e. does the write to PWM_PERIOD_REG(pwm->hwpwm) above
> > already has an effect before PWM_CTL_REG(pwm->hwpwm) is written?
> >
> > > +     }
> > > +
> > > +     if (state->enabled !=3D pwm->state.enabled && state->enabled) {
> > > +             clk_gate &=3D ~PWM_CLK_BYPASS(pwm->hwpwm);
> > > +             clk_gate |=3D PWM_CLK_GATING(pwm->hwpwm);
> > > +             pwm_en |=3D PWM_EN(pwm->hwpwm);
> > > +             sun20i_pwm_writel(sun20i_chip, pwm_en, PWM_ENABLE_REG);
> > > +             sun20i_pwm_writel(sun20i_chip, clk_gate, PWM_CLK_GATE_R=
EG);
> >
> > This is (I guess) racy. If your PWM is running with
> >
> >         .period =3D 10000
> >         .duty_cyle =3D 0
> >         .enabled =3D true
> >
> > and you configure it to
> >
> >         .period =3D 10000
> >         .duty_cyle =3D 10000
> >         .enabled =3D false
> >
> > you get a short spike. For a enabled=3Dtrue -> enabled=3Dfalse transiti=
on
> > you should disable first before configuring duty+period (or skip the
> > latter completely).
>=20
> When switching enabled=3Dtrue -> enabled=3Dfalse then before setting the =
period,
> the enable register will be written false and the pvm will become inactiv=
e.
> this is the place:
> if (state->enabled !=3D pwm->state.enabled && !state->enabled) {

Ah, it seems I missed that (or I just don't understand any more what
meant back then :-)

Best regards
Uwe

--=20
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-K=C3=B6nig         =
   |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |

--rc7sp6r7dmnv5adg
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEP4GsaTp6HlmJrf7Tj4D7WH0S/k4FAmTMx2cACgkQj4D7WH0S
/k4GhwgAkV9eyJPfkP1zrJF7Yqg8WMHmqY/oF2Zv33+JJJB+YAl9YH2wejwF+ZDB
kKdKC0jrTtGdqiKL+56+PUVN+sfUIrF950/hn7PGnhWkWU9KDoei/V5p9RhsFpcK
TN5yfg5BblgKClokAckrxRhuNrhazKcbwX+mBKK/o1eVQJ3yiN3TMeBhsDBD6MWd
lm9msUKJkR/vd1HoDPfBvFVDYRt4yJvs3szUpym3Pa+NYI8gwxsFXzuHVi0vbyHq
vufpMo5DVYDbY0oQ5OQJ72QBPw0BM1wYLwIOAJkJPmV2QV+hCBRZTVM2/oUw50ZF
T5cE6bqOyVxpAZB5jSb9nVD2BXxz0A==
=JpIj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--rc7sp6r7dmnv5adg--