From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756087AbcJFXiq (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Oct 2016 19:38:46 -0400 Received: from mail-vk0-f51.google.com ([209.85.213.51]:35732 "EHLO mail-vk0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753073AbcJFXih (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Oct 2016 19:38:37 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <03B5A3CA1724CE4EAC32B27E39292A677FC5A390AE@AUSMAIL1.AUS.ADVANTECH.CORP> From: Fabio Estevam Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 20:37:50 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: The possible regression in kernel 4.8 - clk: imx: correct AV PLL rate formula To: "Ken.Lin" Cc: "shawnguo@kernel.org" , "kernel@pengutronix.de" , "sboyd@codeaurora.org" , "mturquette@baylibre.com" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-clk@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "Peter.Stretz" , "Peter.Chiang" , Akshay Bhat , Jason Moss , emil@limesaudio.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Ken, On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 8:26 PM, Ken.Lin wrote: > Hi, > > We found a possible regression issue (not seen in kernel 4.7-stable), which has to do with the new NXP commit ba7f4f557eb67ee21c979c8539dc1886f5d5341c when we did a DP test (1920x1080@60) with clock source PLL5. > The DP desired pixel clock (148.5MHz that is calculated from the input of PLL output frequency) would be correct again when we reverted this commit. > Could you please help check if the commit has the side effect since it would have impacts on our on-going project when it requires moving from kernel 4.7 to kernel 4.8 or newer version? > > Please check the following URL for the details > https://www.dropbox.com/s/7wc5jdp8unlsiob/possible_regression_for_clk_imx_correct_VL_PLL_rate_formula.pdf?dl=0 Do these patches from Emil fix the issue? http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg535204.html and http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg535203.html Thanks From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <03B5A3CA1724CE4EAC32B27E39292A677FC5A390AE@AUSMAIL1.AUS.ADVANTECH.CORP> From: Fabio Estevam Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 20:37:50 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: The possible regression in kernel 4.8 - clk: imx: correct AV PLL rate formula To: "Ken.Lin" Cc: "shawnguo@kernel.org" , "kernel@pengutronix.de" , "sboyd@codeaurora.org" , "mturquette@baylibre.com" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-clk@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "Peter.Stretz" , "Peter.Chiang" , Akshay Bhat , Jason Moss , emil@limesaudio.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 List-ID: Hi Ken, On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 8:26 PM, Ken.Lin wrote: > Hi, > > We found a possible regression issue (not seen in kernel 4.7-stable), which has to do with the new NXP commit ba7f4f557eb67ee21c979c8539dc1886f5d5341c when we did a DP test (1920x1080@60) with clock source PLL5. > The DP desired pixel clock (148.5MHz that is calculated from the input of PLL output frequency) would be correct again when we reverted this commit. > Could you please help check if the commit has the side effect since it would have impacts on our on-going project when it requires moving from kernel 4.7 to kernel 4.8 or newer version? > > Please check the following URL for the details > https://www.dropbox.com/s/7wc5jdp8unlsiob/possible_regression_for_clk_imx_correct_VL_PLL_rate_formula.pdf?dl=0 Do these patches from Emil fix the issue? http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg535204.html and http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg535203.html Thanks From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: festevam@gmail.com (Fabio Estevam) Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 20:37:50 -0300 Subject: The possible regression in kernel 4.8 - clk: imx: correct AV PLL rate formula In-Reply-To: References: <03B5A3CA1724CE4EAC32B27E39292A677FC5A390AE@AUSMAIL1.AUS.ADVANTECH.CORP> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Ken, On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 8:26 PM, Ken.Lin wrote: > Hi, > > We found a possible regression issue (not seen in kernel 4.7-stable), which has to do with the new NXP commit ba7f4f557eb67ee21c979c8539dc1886f5d5341c when we did a DP test (1920x1080 at 60) with clock source PLL5. > The DP desired pixel clock (148.5MHz that is calculated from the input of PLL output frequency) would be correct again when we reverted this commit. > Could you please help check if the commit has the side effect since it would have impacts on our on-going project when it requires moving from kernel 4.7 to kernel 4.8 or newer version? > > Please check the following URL for the details > https://www.dropbox.com/s/7wc5jdp8unlsiob/possible_regression_for_clk_imx_correct_VL_PLL_rate_formula.pdf?dl=0 Do these patches from Emil fix the issue? http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg535204.html and http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg535203.html Thanks