From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38B05C47257 for ; Fri, 8 May 2020 14:46:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 026C9216FD for ; Fri, 8 May 2020 14:46:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="JL9DK2J9" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 026C9216FD Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=G+efBwiLxcxwXmmfYVvaRsn9RBRkZU6XjrM3MFX1RvU=; b=JL9DK2J9jH1oRA DAi1Uy7mGpzKhqW2izBhSPjTj1LyHH8aVbna77mCJxL8mjougdMDe4hRjKMLMuKWJ43/W7kwQvg6p MH38/5Quwwzq2SkK2jI9cJLsnesVHSjPVQNgi8ycWRkMQnmmCliVFc32iEGKnWi6DrOpJOK4Lb9Wo b7k3Bs8o73VTOrsPR69kqSHmWiVfyYo/j2EykYMkA1vE+4XpfIa2aJ+KWTr4st4TgNyWt7c+rJDW7 4Ja9+FyIJGYmwLg+T2HxQbCyB6kkOrj/yyDepWoNgaO3RZfvQagecGp4tpmDpRulesSwPtsp4Fo5y tKYJW4kjVuo4w0qaIkHQ==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jX4GY-0004J7-HP; Fri, 08 May 2020 14:46:18 +0000 Received: from mail-ed1-f65.google.com ([209.85.208.65]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jX4GV-0004Id-Eh for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 08 May 2020 14:46:16 +0000 Received: by mail-ed1-f65.google.com with SMTP id f12so1391610edn.12 for ; Fri, 08 May 2020 07:46:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=XarHM7quPtL8Iwp9fTwswhgZUavH/ZpsvuGgVu5XAdQ=; b=bJ1LKaoZWjnVnOhqmxPWwQZ0aG3SDrZb69PgLGxRXIdgyLol2X5mqteVC+oa5L2gmJ NatLs5cMyxM2exES5cmR2PfuQ0GPntYYqG5APfWhi4Fw4bS06pu6Ghl9BKu+CXISU/NA Rwbt0Ax2zUOXhW0mBChW0tj/A31Ar1YjaE9tPtcZ0u7xIzmwsrzTuSOrrmSiBBEsa8go /5cJUqIBggnubskE427JMng8NQk4zgAPRsjL/ObHn8D6yVlaSEgA0ohwPpDvDzI/2HlQ pNc+0/v4xvd6jbJ0SU3ApDFEQx2JTeStt7UGOqFh3gIlw4JfsekRgMF9qfQ5ZZrvFSUV lwxA== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuaLIq/fKZybss8pLil7soMmBl2Bmp71cZJlbS7TuN6yj/j+2BkS JuztePI8UTe/aSKtzbxpbU4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJjIQQnYzAO+FSyQEz9WwVtWHbUUhLRrRKlBcmzLwDdJK0dXJ06g9EggDcxrDp7mWZKsB0M9g== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:1515:: with SMTP id f21mr2448831edw.370.1588949173380; Fri, 08 May 2020 07:46:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kozik-lap ([194.230.155.237]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id a5sm289736edn.14.2020.05.08.07.46.12 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Fri, 08 May 2020 07:46:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 8 May 2020 16:46:10 +0200 From: Krzysztof Kozlowski To: Lukasz Luba Subject: Re: [PATCH] memory/samsung: Maybe wrong triming parameter Message-ID: <20200508144610.GA5983@kozik-lap> References: <20200507114514.11589-1-bernard@vivo.com> <2eeb33f7-1acc-66bb-704a-b724fa0be0a8@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2eeb33f7-1acc-66bb-704a-b724fa0be0a8@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200508_074615_490799_4BB9A0BC X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 23.18 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: opensource.kernel@vivo.com, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Bernard Zhao , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kukjin Kim , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 04:42:46PM +0100, Lukasz Luba wrote: > Hi Bernard, > > > On 5/7/20 12:45 PM, Bernard Zhao wrote: > > In function create_timings_aligned, all the max is to use > > dmc->min_tck->xxx, aligned with val dmc->timings->xxx. > > But the dmc->timings->tFAW use dmc->min_tck->tXP? > > Maybe this point is wrong parameter useing. > > > > Signed-off-by: Bernard Zhao > > --- > > drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c b/drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c > > index 81a1b1d01683..22a43d662833 100644 > > --- a/drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c > > +++ b/drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c > > @@ -1091,7 +1091,7 @@ static int create_timings_aligned(struct exynos5_dmc *dmc, u32 *reg_timing_row, > > /* power related timings */ > > val = dmc->timings->tFAW / clk_period_ps; > > val += dmc->timings->tFAW % clk_period_ps ? 1 : 0; > > - val = max(val, dmc->min_tck->tXP); > > + val = max(val, dmc->min_tck->tFAW); > > reg = &timing_power[0]; > > *reg_timing_power |= TIMING_VAL2REG(reg, val); > > > > Good catch! Indeed this should be a dmc->min_tck->tFAW used for > clamping. > > It didn't show up in testing because the frequency values based on > which the 'clk_period_ps' are calculated are sane. > Check the dump below: > > [ 5.458227] DMC: mem tFAW=25000, clk_period_ps=6060 > [ 5.461743] DMC: tFAW=5, tXP=2 val=5 > [ 5.465273] DMC: mem tFAW=25000, clk_period_ps=4854 > [ 5.470101] DMC: tFAW=5, tXP=2 val=6 > [ 5.473668] DMC: mem tFAW=25000, clk_period_ps=3636 > [ 5.478507] DMC: tFAW=5, tXP=2 val=7 > [ 5.482072] DMC: mem tFAW=25000, clk_period_ps=2421 > [ 5.486951] DMC: tFAW=5, tXP=2 val=11 > [ 5.490531] DMC: mem tFAW=25000, clk_period_ps=1841 > [ 5.495439] DMC: tFAW=5, tXP=2 val=14 > [ 5.499113] DMC: mem tFAW=25000, clk_period_ps=1579 > [ 5.503877] DMC: tFAW=5, tXP=2 val=16 > [ 5.507476] DMC: mem tFAW=25000, clk_period_ps=1373 > [ 5.512368] DMC: tFAW=5, tXP=2 val=19 > [ 5.515968] DMC: mem tFAW=25000, clk_period_ps=1212 > [ 5.520826] DMC: tFAW=5, tXP=2 val=21 > > That's why in the existing configuration it does not harm > (the calculated 'val' is always >= 5) the board. > > But I think this patch should be applied (after small changes in the > commit message). > > @Krzysztof could you have a look on the commit message or take the > patch with small adjustment in the description, please? > > I conditionally give (because of this description): > > Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba Thanks for review. I applied patch with CC-stable and adjusred commit msg. Best regards, Krzysztof _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel