diff mbox series

[v2,2/2] drivers: clk: zynqmp: Update fraction clock check from custom type flags

Message ID 1584048699-24186-3-git-send-email-jolly.shah@xilinx.com (mailing list archive)
State Accepted, archived
Headers show
Series drivers: clk: zynqmp: Update fraction clock check from custom type flags | expand

Commit Message

Jolly Shah March 12, 2020, 9:31 p.m. UTC 
From: Tejas Patel <tejas.patel@xilinx.com>

Older firmware version sets BIT(13) in clkflag to mark a
divider as fractional divider. Updated firmware version sets BIT(4)
in type flags to mark a divider as fractional divider since
BIT(13) is defined as CLK_DUTY_CYCLE_PARENT in the common clk
framework flags.

To support both old and new firmware version, consider BIT(13) from
clkflag and BIT(4) from type_flag to check if divider is fractional
or not.

To maintain compatibility BIT(13) of clkflag in firmware will not be
used in future for any purpose and will be marked as unused.

Signed-off-by: Tejas Patel <tejas.patel@xilinx.com>
Signed-off-by: Rajan Vaja <rajan.vaja@xilinx.com>
Signed-off-by: Jolly Shah <jolly.shah@xilinx.com>
---
 drivers/clk/zynqmp/divider.c | 6 ++++--
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Comments

Stephen Boyd May 27, 2020, 1:01 a.m. UTC | #1 
Quoting Jolly Shah (2020-03-12 14:31:39)
> From: Tejas Patel <tejas.patel@xilinx.com>
> 
> Older firmware version sets BIT(13) in clkflag to mark a
> divider as fractional divider. Updated firmware version sets BIT(4)
> in type flags to mark a divider as fractional divider since
> BIT(13) is defined as CLK_DUTY_CYCLE_PARENT in the common clk
> framework flags.
> 
> To support both old and new firmware version, consider BIT(13) from
> clkflag and BIT(4) from type_flag to check if divider is fractional
> or not.
> 
> To maintain compatibility BIT(13) of clkflag in firmware will not be
> used in future for any purpose and will be marked as unused.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tejas Patel <tejas.patel@xilinx.com>
> Signed-off-by: Rajan Vaja <rajan.vaja@xilinx.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jolly Shah <jolly.shah@xilinx.com>
> ---

Applied to clk-next
Stephen Boyd May 27, 2020, 1:08 a.m. UTC | #2 
Quoting Jolly Shah (2020-03-12 14:31:39)
> From: Tejas Patel <tejas.patel@xilinx.com>
> 
> Older firmware version sets BIT(13) in clkflag to mark a
> divider as fractional divider. Updated firmware version sets BIT(4)
> in type flags to mark a divider as fractional divider since
> BIT(13) is defined as CLK_DUTY_CYCLE_PARENT in the common clk
> framework flags.
> 
> To support both old and new firmware version, consider BIT(13) from
> clkflag and BIT(4) from type_flag to check if divider is fractional
> or not.
> 
> To maintain compatibility BIT(13) of clkflag in firmware will not be
> used in future for any purpose and will be marked as unused.

Why are we mixing the firmware flags with the ccf flags? They shouldn't
be the same. The firmware should have its own 'flag numberspace' that is
distinct from the common clk framework's 'flag numberspace'. Please fix
the code.
Jolly Shah May 28, 2020, 5:44 p.m. UTC | #3 
Hi Stephan,

Thanks for the review.

 > ------Original Message------
 > From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
 > Sent:  Tuesday, May 26, 2020 6:08PM
 > To: Jolly Shah <jolly.shah@xilinx.com>, Arm <arm@kernel.org>, 
Linux-clk <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>, Michal Simek 
<michal.simek@xilinx.com>, Mturquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>, Olof 
<olof@lixom.net>
 > Cc: Rajan Vaja <rajanv@xilinx.com>, 
Linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org 
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, Linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Tejas Patel <tejas.patel@xilinx.com>, 
Rajan Vaja <rajan.vaja@xilinx.com>, Jolly Shah <jolly.shah@xilinx.com>
 > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] drivers: clk: zynqmp: Update fraction 
clock check from custom type flags
 >
> Quoting Jolly Shah (2020-03-12 14:31:39)
>> From: Tejas Patel <tejas.patel@xilinx.com>
>>
>> Older firmware version sets BIT(13) in clkflag to mark a
>> divider as fractional divider. Updated firmware version sets BIT(4)
>> in type flags to mark a divider as fractional divider since
>> BIT(13) is defined as CLK_DUTY_CYCLE_PARENT in the common clk
>> framework flags.
>>
>> To support both old and new firmware version, consider BIT(13) from
>> clkflag and BIT(4) from type_flag to check if divider is fractional
>> or not.
>>
>> To maintain compatibility BIT(13) of clkflag in firmware will not be
>> used in future for any purpose and will be marked as unused.
> 
> Why are we mixing the firmware flags with the ccf flags? They shouldn't
> be the same. The firmware should have its own 'flag numberspace' that is
> distinct from the common clk framework's 'flag numberspace'. Please fix
> the code.
> 

Yes firmware flags are using separate numberspace now. Firmware 
maintains CCF and firmware specific flags separately but earlier 
CLK_FRAC was mistakenly defined in ccf flagspace and hence handled here 
for backward compatibility. Driver takes care of not registering same 
with CCF. Let me know if I misunderstood.

Thanks,
Jolly Shah
Stephen Boyd May 28, 2020, 11:12 p.m. UTC | #4 
Quoting Jolly Shah (2020-05-28 10:44:01)
> Hi Stephan,
> 
> Thanks for the review.
> 
>  > ------Original Message------
>  > From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
>  > Sent:  Tuesday, May 26, 2020 6:08PM
>  > To: Jolly Shah <jolly.shah@xilinx.com>, Arm <arm@kernel.org>, 
> Linux-clk <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>, Michal Simek 
> <michal.simek@xilinx.com>, Mturquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>, Olof 
> <olof@lixom.net>
>  > Cc: Rajan Vaja <rajanv@xilinx.com>, 
> Linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org 
> <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, Linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 
> <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Tejas Patel <tejas.patel@xilinx.com>, 
> Rajan Vaja <rajan.vaja@xilinx.com>, Jolly Shah <jolly.shah@xilinx.com>
>  > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] drivers: clk: zynqmp: Update fraction 
> clock check from custom type flags
>  >
> > Quoting Jolly Shah (2020-03-12 14:31:39)
> >> From: Tejas Patel <tejas.patel@xilinx.com>
> >>
> >> Older firmware version sets BIT(13) in clkflag to mark a
> >> divider as fractional divider. Updated firmware version sets BIT(4)
> >> in type flags to mark a divider as fractional divider since
> >> BIT(13) is defined as CLK_DUTY_CYCLE_PARENT in the common clk
> >> framework flags.
> >>
> >> To support both old and new firmware version, consider BIT(13) from
> >> clkflag and BIT(4) from type_flag to check if divider is fractional
> >> or not.
> >>
> >> To maintain compatibility BIT(13) of clkflag in firmware will not be
> >> used in future for any purpose and will be marked as unused.
> > 
> > Why are we mixing the firmware flags with the ccf flags? They shouldn't
> > be the same. The firmware should have its own 'flag numberspace' that is
> > distinct from the common clk framework's 'flag numberspace'. Please fix
> > the code.
> > 
> 
> Yes firmware flags are using separate numberspace now. Firmware 
> maintains CCF and firmware specific flags separately but earlier 
> CLK_FRAC was mistakenly defined in ccf flagspace and hence handled here 
> for backward compatibility. Driver takes care of not registering same 
> with CCF. Let me know if I misunderstood.

Why is the firmware maintaining CCF specific flags? The firmware
shouldn't know about the CCF flag numbering at all. We can change the
numbers that the CCF flags are assigned to randomly and that shouldn't
mean that the firmware needs to change. Maybe I should apply this patch?

---8<----
diff --git a/include/linux/clk-provider.h b/include/linux/clk-provider.h
index bd1ee9039558..c1f36bca85b0 100644
--- a/include/linux/clk-provider.h
+++ b/include/linux/clk-provider.h
@@ -16,22 +16,22 @@
  *
  * Please update clk_flags[] in drivers/clk/clk.c when making changes here!
  */
-#define CLK_SET_RATE_GATE	BIT(0) /* must be gated across rate change */
-#define CLK_SET_PARENT_GATE	BIT(1) /* must be gated across re-parent */
-#define CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT	BIT(2) /* propagate rate change up one level */
-#define CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED	BIT(3) /* do not gate even if unused */
+#define CLK_SET_RATE_GATE	BIT(13) /* must be gated across rate change */
+#define CLK_SET_PARENT_GATE	BIT(2) /* must be gated across re-parent */
+#define CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT	BIT(3) /* propagate rate change up one level */
+#define CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED	BIT(4) /* do not gate even if unused */
 				/* unused */
 				/* unused */
-#define CLK_GET_RATE_NOCACHE	BIT(6) /* do not use the cached clk rate */
-#define CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT BIT(7) /* don't re-parent on rate change */
-#define CLK_GET_ACCURACY_NOCACHE BIT(8) /* do not use the cached clk accuracy */
-#define CLK_RECALC_NEW_RATES	BIT(9) /* recalc rates after notifications */
-#define CLK_SET_RATE_UNGATE	BIT(10) /* clock needs to run to set rate */
-#define CLK_IS_CRITICAL		BIT(11) /* do not gate, ever */
+#define CLK_GET_RATE_NOCACHE	BIT(5) /* do not use the cached clk rate */
+#define CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT BIT(6) /* don't re-parent on rate change */
+#define CLK_GET_ACCURACY_NOCACHE BIT(7) /* do not use the cached clk accuracy */
+#define CLK_RECALC_NEW_RATES	BIT(8) /* recalc rates after notifications */
+#define CLK_SET_RATE_UNGATE	BIT(9) /* clock needs to run to set rate */
+#define CLK_IS_CRITICAL		BIT(10) /* do not gate, ever */
 /* parents need enable during gate/ungate, set rate and re-parent */
-#define CLK_OPS_PARENT_ENABLE	BIT(12)
+#define CLK_OPS_PARENT_ENABLE	BIT(11)
 /* duty cycle call may be forwarded to the parent clock */
-#define CLK_DUTY_CYCLE_PARENT	BIT(13)
+#define CLK_DUTY_CYCLE_PARENT	BIT(12)
 
 struct clk;
 struct clk_hw;
Jolly Shah May 29, 2020, 9:20 p.m. UTC | #5 
Hi Stephan,

 > ------Original Message------
 > From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
 > Sent:  Thursday, May 28, 2020 4:12PM
 > To: Jolly Shah <jolly.shah@xilinx.com>, Arm <arm@kernel.org>, 
Linux-clk <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>, Michal Simek 
<michal.simek@xilinx.com>, Mturquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>, Olof 
<olof@lixom.net>
 > Cc: Rajan Vaja <rajanv@xilinx.com>, 
Linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org 
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, Linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Tejas Patel <tejas.patel@xilinx.com>, 
Rajan Vaja <rajan.vaja@xilinx.com>
 > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] drivers: clk: zynqmp: Update fraction 
clock check from custom type flags
 >
> Quoting Jolly Shah (2020-05-28 10:44:01)
>> Hi Stephan,
>>
>> Thanks for the review.
>>
>>   > ------Original Message------
>>   > From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
>>   > Sent:  Tuesday, May 26, 2020 6:08PM
>>   > To: Jolly Shah <jolly.shah@xilinx.com>, Arm <arm@kernel.org>,
>> Linux-clk <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>, Michal Simek
>> <michal.simek@xilinx.com>, Mturquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>, Olof
>> <olof@lixom.net>
>>   > Cc: Rajan Vaja <rajanv@xilinx.com>,
>> Linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
>> <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, Linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>> <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Tejas Patel <tejas.patel@xilinx.com>,
>> Rajan Vaja <rajan.vaja@xilinx.com>, Jolly Shah <jolly.shah@xilinx.com>
>>   > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] drivers: clk: zynqmp: Update fraction
>> clock check from custom type flags
>>   >
>>> Quoting Jolly Shah (2020-03-12 14:31:39)
>>>> From: Tejas Patel <tejas.patel@xilinx.com>
>>>>
>>>> Older firmware version sets BIT(13) in clkflag to mark a
>>>> divider as fractional divider. Updated firmware version sets BIT(4)
>>>> in type flags to mark a divider as fractional divider since
>>>> BIT(13) is defined as CLK_DUTY_CYCLE_PARENT in the common clk
>>>> framework flags.
>>>>
>>>> To support both old and new firmware version, consider BIT(13) from
>>>> clkflag and BIT(4) from type_flag to check if divider is fractional
>>>> or not.
>>>>
>>>> To maintain compatibility BIT(13) of clkflag in firmware will not be
>>>> used in future for any purpose and will be marked as unused.
>>>
>>> Why are we mixing the firmware flags with the ccf flags? They shouldn't
>>> be the same. The firmware should have its own 'flag numberspace' that is
>>> distinct from the common clk framework's 'flag numberspace'. Please fix
>>> the code.
>>>
>>
>> Yes firmware flags are using separate numberspace now. Firmware
>> maintains CCF and firmware specific flags separately but earlier
>> CLK_FRAC was mistakenly defined in ccf flagspace and hence handled here
>> for backward compatibility. Driver takes care of not registering same
>> with CCF. Let me know if I misunderstood.
> 
> Why is the firmware maintaining CCF specific flags? The firmware
> shouldn't know about the CCF flag numbering at all. We can change the
> numbers that the CCF flags are assigned to randomly and that shouldn't
> mean that the firmware needs to change. Maybe I should apply this patch?

Got it. Will fix it.

Thanks,
Jolly Shah


> 
> ---8<----
> diff --git a/include/linux/clk-provider.h b/include/linux/clk-provider.h
> index bd1ee9039558..c1f36bca85b0 100644
> --- a/include/linux/clk-provider.h
> +++ b/include/linux/clk-provider.h
> @@ -16,22 +16,22 @@
>    *
>    * Please update clk_flags[] in drivers/clk/clk.c when making changes here!
>    */
> -#define CLK_SET_RATE_GATE	BIT(0) /* must be gated across rate change */
> -#define CLK_SET_PARENT_GATE	BIT(1) /* must be gated across re-parent */
> -#define CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT	BIT(2) /* propagate rate change up one level */
> -#define CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED	BIT(3) /* do not gate even if unused */
> +#define CLK_SET_RATE_GATE	BIT(13) /* must be gated across rate change */
> +#define CLK_SET_PARENT_GATE	BIT(2) /* must be gated across re-parent */
> +#define CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT	BIT(3) /* propagate rate change up one level */
> +#define CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED	BIT(4) /* do not gate even if unused */
>   				/* unused */
>   				/* unused */
> -#define CLK_GET_RATE_NOCACHE	BIT(6) /* do not use the cached clk rate */
> -#define CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT BIT(7) /* don't re-parent on rate change */
> -#define CLK_GET_ACCURACY_NOCACHE BIT(8) /* do not use the cached clk accuracy */
> -#define CLK_RECALC_NEW_RATES	BIT(9) /* recalc rates after notifications */
> -#define CLK_SET_RATE_UNGATE	BIT(10) /* clock needs to run to set rate */
> -#define CLK_IS_CRITICAL		BIT(11) /* do not gate, ever */
> +#define CLK_GET_RATE_NOCACHE	BIT(5) /* do not use the cached clk rate */
> +#define CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT BIT(6) /* don't re-parent on rate change */
> +#define CLK_GET_ACCURACY_NOCACHE BIT(7) /* do not use the cached clk accuracy */
> +#define CLK_RECALC_NEW_RATES	BIT(8) /* recalc rates after notifications */
> +#define CLK_SET_RATE_UNGATE	BIT(9) /* clock needs to run to set rate */
> +#define CLK_IS_CRITICAL		BIT(10) /* do not gate, ever */
>   /* parents need enable during gate/ungate, set rate and re-parent */
> -#define CLK_OPS_PARENT_ENABLE	BIT(12)
> +#define CLK_OPS_PARENT_ENABLE	BIT(11)
>   /* duty cycle call may be forwarded to the parent clock */
> -#define CLK_DUTY_CYCLE_PARENT	BIT(13)
> +#define CLK_DUTY_CYCLE_PARENT	BIT(12)
>   
>   struct clk;
>   struct clk_hw;
>
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/clk/zynqmp/divider.c b/drivers/clk/zynqmp/divider.c
index 8eed715..efe2ed6 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/zynqmp/divider.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/zynqmp/divider.c
@@ -25,7 +25,8 @@ 
 #define to_zynqmp_clk_divider(_hw)		\
 	container_of(_hw, struct zynqmp_clk_divider, hw)
 
-#define CLK_FRAC	BIT(13) /* has a fractional parent */
+#define CLK_FRAC		BIT(13) /* has a fractional parent */
+#define CUSTOM_FLAG_CLK_FRAC	BIT(0) /* has a fractional parent in custom type flag */
 
 /**
  * struct zynqmp_clk_divider - adjustable divider clock
@@ -307,7 +308,8 @@  struct clk_hw *zynqmp_clk_register_divider(const char *name,
 	init.num_parents = 1;
 
 	/* struct clk_divider assignments */
-	div->is_frac = !!(nodes->flag & CLK_FRAC);
+	div->is_frac = !!((nodes->flag & CLK_FRAC) |
+			  (nodes->custom_type_flag & CUSTOM_FLAG_CLK_FRAC));
 	div->flags = nodes->type_flag;
 	div->hw.init = &init;
 	div->clk_id = clk_id;