Hi Richard,
On 11/29/2016 04:07 AM, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 05:03:31PM -0600, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
>> +int cpts_register(struct cpts *cpts)
>> {
>> int err, i;
>>
>> - cpts->info = cpts_info;
>> - spin_lock_init(&cpts->lock);
>> -
>> - cpts->cc.read = cpts_systim_read;
>> - cpts->cc.mask = CLOCKSOURCE_MASK(32);
>> - cpts->cc_mult = mult;
>> - cpts->cc.mult = mult;
>> - cpts->cc.shift = shift;
>> -
>> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&cpts->events);
>> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&cpts->pool);
>> for (i = 0; i < CPTS_MAX_EVENTS; i++)
>> list_add(&cpts->pool_data[i].list, &cpts->pool);
>>
>> - cpts_clk_init(dev, cpts);
>> + clk_enable(cpts->refclk);
>> +
>> cpts_write32(cpts, CPTS_EN, control);
>> cpts_write32(cpts, TS_PEND_EN, int_enable);
>>
>> + cpts->cc.mult = cpts->cc_mult;
>
> It is not clear why you set cc.mult in a different place than
> cc.shift. That isn't logical, but maybe later patches make it
> clear...
cc.mult has to be reloaded to original value each time CPTS is
registered(restarted)
as it can be modified by cpts_ptp_adjfreq().
While cc.shift is static.
>
>> timecounter_init(&cpts->tc, &cpts->cc, ktime_to_ns(ktime_get_real()));
>>
[...]
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cpts_unregister);
>>
>> +struct cpts *cpts_create(struct device *dev, void __iomem *regs,
>> + u32 mult, u32 shift)
>> +{
>> + struct cpts *cpts;
>> +
>> + if (!regs || !dev)
>> + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>
> There is no need for this test, as the caller will always pass valid
> pointers. (This isn't a user space library!)
>
ok
--
regards,
-grygorii
