[PATCH 0/3] clk: divider: three exactness fixes (and a rant)
From: s.hauer@pengutronix.de (Sascha Hauer)
Date: 2015-02-23 07:23:13
Also in:
lkml
On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 11:40:22AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
Hello, TLDR: only apply patch 1 and rip of CLK_DIVIDER_ROUND_CLOSEST. I stared at clk-divider.c for some time now given Sascha's failing test case. I found a fix for the failure (which happens to be what Sascha suspected). The other two patches fix problems only present when handling dividers that have CLK_DIVIDER_ROUND_CLOSEST set. Note that these are still heavily broken however. So having a 4bit-divider and a parent clk of 10000 (as in Sascha's test case) requesting clk_set_rate(clk, 666) sets the rate to 625 (div=15) instead of 667 (div=16). The reason is the choice of parent_rate in clk_divider_bestdiv's loop is wrong for CLK_DIVIDER_ROUND_CLOSEST (with and without patch 1). A fix here is non-trivial and for sure more than one rate must be tested here. This is complicated by the fact that clk_round_rate might return a value bigger than the requested rate which convinces me (once more) that it's a bad idea to allow that. Even if this was fixed for .round_rate, clk_divider_set_rate is still broken because it also uses div = DIV_ROUND_UP(parent_rate, rate); to calculate the (pretended) best divider to get near rate. Note this makes at least two reasons to remove support for CLK_DIVIDER_ROUND_CLOSEST! Instead I'd favour creating a function clk_round_rate_nearest
Full ack. It's a clock consumer who wants to decide the rounding strategy, not the clock itself and for sure not a specific entity of the clock tree. CLK_DIVIDER_ROUND_CLOSEST should be dropped. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |