From: Elaine Zhang <redacted>
The suggestion that is from IC designer, the correct pll sequence setting
should be like these:
----
set pll to slow mode or other plls
set pll down
set pll params
set pll up
wait pll lock status
set pll to normal mode
----
Hence, there are potential risks that we need to fix:
rockchip_rk3399_wait_pll_lock - timeout waiting for pll to lock
rockchip_rk3399_pll_set_params - pll update unsucessful, trying to restore old params
Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Xing Zheng <redacted>
---
drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c | 10 ++++++++++
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
@@ -681,6 +681,11 @@ static int rockchip_rk3399_pll_set_params(struct rockchip_clk_pll *pll,rate_change_remuxed=1;}+/* set pll power down */+writel(HIWORD_UPDATE(RK3399_PLLCON3_PWRDOWN,+RK3399_PLLCON3_PWRDOWN,0),+pll->reg_base+RK3399_PLLCON(3));+/* update pll values */writel_relaxed(HIWORD_UPDATE(rate->fbdiv,RK3399_PLLCON0_FBDIV_MASK,RK3399_PLLCON0_FBDIV_SHIFT),
@@ -704,6 +709,11 @@ static int rockchip_rk3399_pll_set_params(struct rockchip_clk_pll *pll,RK3399_PLLCON3_DSMPD_SHIFT),pll->reg_base+RK3399_PLLCON(3));+/* set pll power up */+writel(HIWORD_UPDATE(0,+RK3399_PLLCON3_PWRDOWN,0),+pll->reg_base+RK3399_PLLCON(3));+/* wait for the pll to lock */ret=rockchip_rk3399_pll_wait_lock(pll);if(ret){
From: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> Date: 2016-08-03 00:57:18
Xing,
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 6:13 AM, Xing Zheng [off-list ref] wrote:
From: Elaine Zhang <redacted>
The suggestion that is from IC designer, the correct pll sequence setting
should be like these:
----
set pll to slow mode or other plls
set pll down
set pll params
set pll up
wait pll lock status
set pll to normal mode
----
Hence, there are potential risks that we need to fix:
rockchip_rk3399_wait_pll_lock - timeout waiting for pll to lock
rockchip_rk3399_pll_set_params - pll update unsucessful, trying to restore old params
I still don't understand how that groks with the statement in the TRM:
In most cases the PLL programming can be changed on-the-fly and the PLL will simply slew to the new frequency
That makes it sound like these PLLs are super great at dynamic updates.
Hi Doug,
On 2016?08?03? 08:49, Doug Anderson wrote:
Xing,
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 6:13 AM, Xing Zheng [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
From: Elaine Zhang <redacted>
The suggestion that is from IC designer, the correct pll sequence setting
should be like these:
----
set pll to slow mode or other plls
set pll down
set pll params
set pll up
wait pll lock status
set pll to normal mode
----
Hence, there are potential risks that we need to fix:
rockchip_rk3399_wait_pll_lock - timeout waiting for pll to lock
rockchip_rk3399_pll_set_params - pll update unsucessful, trying to restore old params
I still don't understand how that groks with the statement in the TRM:
quoted
In most cases the PLL programming can be changed on-the-fly and the PLL will simply slew to the new frequency
That makes it sound like these PLLs are super great at dynamic updates.
Well, I will report it to IC & Doc folkers to update the TRM and make it
clear.
Thanks.
--
- Xing Zheng