Sebastian, thanks for your reply, please find my comments below:
On 06.04.2015 18:43, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > On 06.04.2015 16:25, Sergej Sawazki wrote: >> The divider calculation for multisynth 6 and 7 differs from the >> calculation for multisynth 0-5. >> >> For MS6 and MS7, set MSx_P1 directly, MSx_P1=divide value >> [AN619, p. 6]. >> >> Referenced document: >> [AN619] Manually Generating an Si5351 Register Map, Rev. 0.4 >> >> Signed-off-by: Sergej Sawazki <c...@gmx.de> > > Sergej, > > thanks for the patch, I do have some remarks though. > >> --- >> drivers/clk/clk-si5351.c | 12 ++++++++++-- >> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-si5351.c b/drivers/clk/clk-si5351.c >> index 44ea107..310078d 100644 >> --- a/drivers/clk/clk-si5351.c >> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-si5351.c >> @@ -552,7 +552,8 @@ static const struct clk_ops si5351_pll_ops = { >> * MSx_P2[19:0] = 128 * b - c * floor(128 * b/c) = (128*b) mod c >> * MSx_P3[19:0] = c >> * >> - * MS[6,7] are integer (P1) divide only, P2 = 0, P3 = 0 >> + * MS[6,7] are integer (P1) divide only, P1 = divide value, >> + * P2 and P3 are not applicable >> * >> * for 150MHz < fOUT <= 160MHz: >> * >> @@ -718,11 +719,18 @@ static long si5351_msynth_round_rate(struct >> clk_hw *hw, unsigned long rate, >> do_div(lltmp, a * c + b); >> rate = (unsigned long)lltmp; >> >> - /* calculate parameters */ >> + /* >> + * calculate parameters >> + * for multisync6-7 set p1 directly, fOUT = fIN / p1 > > I'd say the comment about the differences of MS6,7 in the function's > comment block is enough, no need to repeat it again here. > I agree. >> + */ >> if (divby4) { >> hwdata->params.p3 = 1; >> hwdata->params.p2 = 0; >> hwdata->params.p1 = 0; >> + } else if (hwdata->num >= 6) { >> + hwdata->params.p3 = 1; >> + hwdata->params.p2 = 0; >> + hwdata->params.p1 = a; > > Hmm. Just overruling what will be written in the registers is > definitely not enough. If you look at the first two lines of this > hunk, you'll admit that the visible representation (rate) of the MS > frequency isn't affected by your patch at all. > > That basically means that real frequency and frequency in the kernel > will differ, so we have to put this change in the param calculation > above this hunk instead. The extra else-if-path here is ok though. > You right, I will take a look at that and provide a patch v2. Sergej -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/