diff mbox series

clk: zynqmp: pll: rectify rate rounding in zynqmp_pll_round_rate

Message ID 20220826142030.213805-1-quanyang.wang@windriver.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show
Series clk: zynqmp: pll: rectify rate rounding in zynqmp_pll_round_rate | expand

Commit Message

Quanyang Wang Aug. 26, 2022, 2:20 p.m. UTC 
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>
---
 drivers/clk/zynqmp/pll.c | 31 +++++++++++++++----------------
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

Comments

Datta, Shubhrajyoti Aug. 30, 2022, 6:18 a.m. UTC | #1 
[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>
Stephen Boyd Aug. 30, 2022, 10:06 p.m. UTC | #2 
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 mbox series

Patch

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;
 }
 
 /**