Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 3 Jul 2023 09:38:48 +0200 | From | Maxime Ripard <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 6/8] clk: sunxi-ng: mux: Support finding closest rate |
| |
On Sun, Jul 02, 2023 at 07:55:25PM +0200, Frank Oltmanns wrote: > When finding the best rate for a mux clock, consider rates that are > higher than the requested rate by introducing a new clk_ops structure > that uses the existing __clk_mux_determine_rate_closest function. > Furthermore introduce an initialization macro that uses this new > structure. > > Signed-off-by: Frank Oltmanns <frank@oltmanns.dev> > --- > drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_mux.c | 13 +++++++++++++ > drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_mux.h | 17 +++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_mux.c b/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_mux.c > index 8594d6a4addd..49a592bdeacf 100644 > --- a/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_mux.c > +++ b/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_mux.c > @@ -264,6 +264,19 @@ static unsigned long ccu_mux_recalc_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, > parent_rate); > } > > +const struct clk_ops ccu_mux_closest_ops = { > + .disable = ccu_mux_disable, > + .enable = ccu_mux_enable, > + .is_enabled = ccu_mux_is_enabled, > + > + .get_parent = ccu_mux_get_parent, > + .set_parent = ccu_mux_set_parent, > + > + .determine_rate = __clk_mux_determine_rate_closest, > + .recalc_rate = ccu_mux_recalc_rate, > +}; > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(ccu_mux_closest_ops, SUNXI_CCU); > +
This is also a bit inconsistent with the other clocks: most (all?) of them will simply handle this through a flag, but this one requires a new set of clk_ops as well?
I think we should create our own wrapper here around __clk_mux_determine_rate and either call __clk_mux_determine_rate_closest or __clk_mux_determine_rate depending on the state of the flags, or call __clk_mux_determine_rate_flags with the proper flags set for our clock.
The former is probably slightly simpler.
> const struct clk_ops ccu_mux_ops = { > .disable = ccu_mux_disable, > .enable = ccu_mux_enable, > diff --git a/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_mux.h b/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_mux.h > index 2c1811a445b0..c4ee14e43719 100644 > --- a/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_mux.h > +++ b/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_mux.h > @@ -46,6 +46,22 @@ struct ccu_mux { > struct ccu_common common; > }; > > +#define SUNXI_CCU_MUX_TABLE_WITH_GATE_CLOSEST(_struct, _name, _parents, _table, \ > + _reg, _shift, _width, _gate, \ > + _flags) \ > + struct ccu_mux _struct = { \ > + .enable = _gate, \ > + .mux = _SUNXI_CCU_MUX_TABLE(_shift, _width, _table), \ > + .common = { \ > + .reg = _reg, \ > + .hw.init = CLK_HW_INIT_PARENTS(_name, \ > + _parents, \ > + &ccu_mux_closest_ops, \ > + _flags), \ > + .features = CCU_FEATURE_CLOSEST_RATE, \ > + } \ > + } > +
I'm fine with that one, but like we discussed on the NM (I think?) patch already, this creates some clocks and macros that will use the feature as a flag, and some will encode it into their name.
Given that we need it here too, I'm really inclined to prefer what you did there, and thus create a new macro for pll-video0 instead of modifying the existing one.
Maxime [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |