lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Nov]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] spi: cadence-quadspi: Add upper limit safety check to baudrate divisor
From
Hi Nathan,
Thanks for your contribution.
However, there are a few issues that I would like you to address.

On 24/11/22 02:47, Nathan Barrett-Morrison wrote:
> While bringing up the cadence-quadspi driver on a customer board,
> I discovered that the baud divisor calculation can exceed the
> peripheral's maximum in some circumstances. This will prevent it.
What is the peripheral's maximum? Is the peripheral a flash?
Please define what you mean by "some circumstances".

>
> Signed-off-by: Nathan Barrett-Morrison <nathan.morrison@timesys.com>
> ---
> drivers/spi/spi-cadence-quadspi.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-cadence-quadspi.c b/drivers/spi/spi-cadence-quadspi.c
> index 447230547945..250575fb7b0e 100644
> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-cadence-quadspi.c
> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-cadence-quadspi.c
> @@ -1119,6 +1119,10 @@ static void cqspi_config_baudrate_div(struct cqspi_st *cqspi)
> /* Recalculate the baudrate divisor based on QSPI specification. */
> div = DIV_ROUND_UP(ref_clk_hz, 2 * cqspi->sclk) - 1;
>
> + /* Maximum baud divisor */
> + if (div > CQSPI_REG_CONFIG_BAUD_MASK)

I don't think comparing "greater than" with a MASK is atall a good idea.

> + div = CQSPI_REG_CONFIG_BAUD_MASK;
I would not encourage this either.


> +
> reg = readl(reg_base + CQSPI_REG_CONFIG);
> reg &= ~(CQSPI_REG_CONFIG_BAUD_MASK << CQSPI_REG_CONFIG_BAUD_LSB);
> reg |= (div & CQSPI_REG_CONFIG_BAUD_MASK) << CQSPI_REG_CONFIG_BAUD_LSB;

Either come up with a better MACRO, or if what I understand
is correct, the peripheral's max value will depend, well
on the _peripheral_ in which case it is that "peripheral" driver's
responsibility to properly tell the controller what to do.


Again, I don't fully understand your situation is as in
what is the peripheral you are using. So please elaborate on that.

Importantly, I would suggest that you _NEVER_ compare ANY value to a
MASK Macro. MASK Macros are meant to MASK bits.



--
Thanks and Regards,
Dhruva Gole

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-11-24 07:47    [W:0.065 / U:0.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site