Hi Maxime,
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 11:15:50AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 09:37:17PM +0200, Jacopo Mondi wrote:
> > Check that the PLL1 output frequency does not exceed the maximum allowed
> > 1GHz
> > frequency.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+rene...@jmondi.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/media/i2c/ov5640.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++----
> > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/ov5640.c b/drivers/media/i2c/ov5640.c
> > index e098435..1f2e72d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/media/i2c/ov5640.c
> > +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/ov5640.c
> > @@ -770,7 +770,7 @@ static int ov5640_mod_reg(struct ov5640_dev *sensor,
> > u16 reg,
> > * always set to either 1 or 2 in the vendor kernels.
> > */
> > #define OV5640_SYSDIV_MIN 1
> > -#define OV5640_SYSDIV_MAX 2
> > +#define OV5640_SYSDIV_MAX 16
> >
> > /*
> > * This is supposed to be ranging from 1 to 16, but the value is always
> > @@ -806,15 +806,20 @@ static int ov5640_mod_reg(struct ov5640_dev *sensor,
> > u16 reg,
> > * This is supposed to be ranging from 1 to 8, but the value is always
> > * set to 1 in the vendor kernels.
> > */
> > -#define OV5640_PCLK_ROOT_DIV 1
> > +#define OV5640_PCLK_ROOT_DIV 1
> > +#define OV5640_PLL_SYS_ROOT_DIVIDER_BYPASS 0x00
> >
> > static unsigned long ov5640_compute_sys_clk(struct ov5640_dev *sensor,
> > u8 pll_prediv, u8 pll_mult,
> > u8 sysdiv)
> > {
> > - unsigned long rate = clk_get_rate(sensor->xclk);
> > + unsigned long sysclk = sensor->xclk_freq / pll_prediv * pll_mult;
> >
> > - return rate / pll_prediv * pll_mult / sysdiv;
> > + /* PLL1 output cannot exceed 1GHz. */
> > + if (sysclk / 1000000 > 1000)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + return sysclk / sysdiv;
> > }
> >
> > static unsigned long ov5640_calc_sys_clk(struct ov5640_dev *sensor,
> > @@ -844,6 +849,16 @@ static unsigned long ov5640_calc_sys_clk(struct
> > ov5640_dev *sensor,
> > _rate = ov5640_compute_sys_clk(sensor,
> > OV5640_PLL_PREDIV,
> > _pll_mult, _sysdiv);
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * We have reached the maximum allowed PLL1 output,
> > + * increase sysdiv.
> > + */
> > + if (rate == 0) {
> > + _pll_mult = OV5640_PLL_MULT_MAX + 1;
> > + continue;
> > + }
> > +
>
> Both your patches look sane to me. However, I guess here you're
> setting _pll_mult at this value so that you won't reach the for
> condition on the next iteration?
>
> Wouldn't it be cleaner to just use a break statement here?Yes, it's much cleaner indeed. Not sure why I thought this was a good idea tbh. Would you like me to send a v2, or can you take care of this when re-sending v5? Thanks j > > Thanks! > Maxime > > -- > Maxime Ripard, Bootlin > Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering > https://bootlin.com
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
