Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: rename clk_core_get_boundaries() to clk_hw_get_boundaries() and expose

2017-12-29 Thread Alexander Kochetkov
> 29 дек. 2017 г., в 3:14, Stephen Boyd написал(а): > > I'm asking if the rate is capped on the consumer side with > clk_set_max_rate() or if it's capped on the clk provider side to > express a hardware constraint. I do that using clk_set_max_rate() at provider size inside

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: rename clk_core_get_boundaries() to clk_hw_get_boundaries() and expose

2017-12-29 Thread Alexander Kochetkov
> 29 дек. 2017 г., в 3:14, Stephen Boyd написал(а): > > I'm asking if the rate is capped on the consumer side with > clk_set_max_rate() or if it's capped on the clk provider side to > express a hardware constraint. I do that using clk_set_max_rate() at provider size inside clk-rk3188.c. > >

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: rename clk_core_get_boundaries() to clk_hw_get_boundaries() and expose

2017-12-28 Thread Stephen Boyd
On 12/28, Alexander Kochetkov wrote: > Initial thread here: > https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-clk/msg21682.html > > > > 27 дек. 2017 г., в 4:06, Stephen Boyd написал(а): > > > > Are these limits the min/max limits that the parent clk can > > output at? Or the min/max

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: rename clk_core_get_boundaries() to clk_hw_get_boundaries() and expose

2017-12-28 Thread Stephen Boyd
On 12/28, Alexander Kochetkov wrote: > Initial thread here: > https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-clk/msg21682.html > > > > 27 дек. 2017 г., в 4:06, Stephen Boyd написал(а): > > > > Are these limits the min/max limits that the parent clk can > > output at? Or the min/max limits that software

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: rename clk_core_get_boundaries() to clk_hw_get_boundaries() and expose

2017-12-28 Thread Alexander Kochetkov
Initial thread here: https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-clk/msg21682.html > 27 дек. 2017 г., в 4:06, Stephen Boyd написал(а): > > Are these limits the min/max limits that the parent clk can > output at? Or the min/max limits that software has constrained on > the clk? >

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: rename clk_core_get_boundaries() to clk_hw_get_boundaries() and expose

2017-12-28 Thread Alexander Kochetkov
Initial thread here: https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-clk/msg21682.html > 27 дек. 2017 г., в 4:06, Stephen Boyd написал(а): > > Are these limits the min/max limits that the parent clk can > output at? Or the min/max limits that software has constrained on > the clk? > Don’t know how to

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: rename clk_core_get_boundaries() to clk_hw_get_boundaries() and expose

2017-12-26 Thread Stephen Boyd
On 12/25, Alexander Kochetkov wrote: > > > 21 дек. 2017 г., в 23:07, Stephen Boyd написал(а): > > > > Can you convert to the determine_rate op instead of round_rate? > > That function should tell you the min/max limits so that you > > don't need to query that information

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: rename clk_core_get_boundaries() to clk_hw_get_boundaries() and expose

2017-12-26 Thread Stephen Boyd
On 12/25, Alexander Kochetkov wrote: > > > 21 дек. 2017 г., в 23:07, Stephen Boyd написал(а): > > > > Can you convert to the determine_rate op instead of round_rate? > > That function should tell you the min/max limits so that you > > don't need to query that information from the core. > > I

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: rename clk_core_get_boundaries() to clk_hw_get_boundaries() and expose

2017-12-25 Thread Alexander Kochetkov
> 21 дек. 2017 г., в 23:07, Stephen Boyd написал(а): > > Can you convert to the determine_rate op instead of round_rate? > That function should tell you the min/max limits so that you > don't need to query that information from the core. I converted

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: rename clk_core_get_boundaries() to clk_hw_get_boundaries() and expose

2017-12-25 Thread Alexander Kochetkov
> 21 дек. 2017 г., в 23:07, Stephen Boyd написал(а): > > Can you convert to the determine_rate op instead of round_rate? > That function should tell you the min/max limits so that you > don't need to query that information from the core. I converted rockchip_fractional_approximation() to

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: rename clk_core_get_boundaries() to clk_hw_get_boundaries() and expose

2017-12-21 Thread Stephen Boyd
On 12/21, Alexander Kochetkov wrote: > In order to provide a way to know clock limits to clock providers. > > The patch is needed for fixing commit 5d890c2df900 ("clk: rockchip: > add special approximation to fix up fractional clk's jitter"). > Custom approximation function introduced by the

Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: rename clk_core_get_boundaries() to clk_hw_get_boundaries() and expose

2017-12-21 Thread Stephen Boyd
On 12/21, Alexander Kochetkov wrote: > In order to provide a way to know clock limits to clock providers. > > The patch is needed for fixing commit 5d890c2df900 ("clk: rockchip: > add special approximation to fix up fractional clk's jitter"). > Custom approximation function introduced by the

[PATCH 1/2] clk: rename clk_core_get_boundaries() to clk_hw_get_boundaries() and expose

2017-12-21 Thread Alexander Kochetkov
In order to provide a way to know clock limits to clock providers. The patch is needed for fixing commit 5d890c2df900 ("clk: rockchip: add special approximation to fix up fractional clk's jitter"). Custom approximation function introduced by the patch, can select frequency rate larger than one

[PATCH 1/2] clk: rename clk_core_get_boundaries() to clk_hw_get_boundaries() and expose

2017-12-21 Thread Alexander Kochetkov
In order to provide a way to know clock limits to clock providers. The patch is needed for fixing commit 5d890c2df900 ("clk: rockchip: add special approximation to fix up fractional clk's jitter"). Custom approximation function introduced by the patch, can select frequency rate larger than one