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=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 84E6BC433E6 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 03:11:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B52620882 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 03:11:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2437252AbhASDLU (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jan 2021 22:11:20 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:47966 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2437147AbhASDK6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jan 2021 22:10:58 -0500 Received: from mail-qv1-xf32.google.com (mail-qv1-xf32.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f32]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84211C061573; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 19:10:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qv1-xf32.google.com with SMTP id l14so8528535qvh.2; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 19:10:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=jms.id.au; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Bkirs0xt3XLTsL7Ppx9AG5Pdbq7hPLnjo1ZWo6evLOA=; b=RAtvlXUhm8RArwZ3wSI+30Dj7+bGzn9tr/P6rGPOvZpqRR3n75HjlfQOXLwWV36Q8J N+G+LRv/KhTOPMA+IDMP0LKzHM0HMYASb26+7537iYLLePHdjh6yoHIZ0eUqEh6vitJQ OwQuuiTtW8noH/NngZH89NHqHTzQlnNSS4uXw= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Bkirs0xt3XLTsL7Ppx9AG5Pdbq7hPLnjo1ZWo6evLOA=; b=BQx9D/KJWWF+U0NpeD3oCbxDBGXPtT0G0TAT0PT0XQHe4Ym5UXqrMPCELF56/NuxB+ OEfsl4QUcZHdwfK6ocIY59cCFheCZmIwr9RZUsJM/z5IUkRD2WNeLr+IWEmU8OOe0DQE Xm8y9jpkCIEP9vYp4nocCxsOAtYf0GqbnX25HAsq9BrRriTiciebmB3KjL5ZQzqdNwx2 o0kPh7ReXdqM/FQScRA2JVAC03NbHNQ/IOJG/yq1IMP+nqCugq9YGDVjNo8C9i5iwBN1 P72Msug6vmxjRxivkDsXJwk2sTojSsDgdlwXj+Iw/1OyS6YzA0dv4S42A2hWZC9byFf8 9Hcw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531CWf1Ju1/LQLmDy6qgQmrfNBscCt5JjVvHQyjrOJhNDPx1wk5g QOa57UjFeyfTGkjciGMfJIKBXo2FAayxgjaHwq9n5miXZSA1bQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzjC/DCnkjtreGb9bDOj46D/UPo+qxk1NQO0thQYodj/luLEcDNpJhxNw+2s3Wr9g/BRHCwwHj7B288JX+08e0= X-Received: by 2002:a0c:8304:: with SMTP id j4mr2395035qva.18.1611025817765; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 19:10:17 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210118100813.30821-1-ryan_chen@aspeedtech.com> <20210118100813.30821-2-ryan_chen@aspeedtech.com> <02b792c847ea1841603629ba0377cfdfff479882.camel@linux.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: From: Joel Stanley Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 03:10:05 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] clk: aspeed: Fix APLL calculate formula for ast2600-A2 To: Ryan Chen Cc: Joel Stanley , Michael Turquette , Stephen Boyd , "linux-clk@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "andrewrj@au1.ibm.com" , BMC-SW , Andrew Jeffery Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 19 Jan 2021 at 03:04, Ryan Chen wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Joel Stanley > > Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2021 10:20 AM > > To: Ryan Chen ; Michael Turquette > > ; Stephen Boyd ; > > linux-clk@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; > > andrewrj@au1.ibm.com; BMC-SW > > Cc: joel@jms.id.au; Andrew Jeffery > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] clk: aspeed: Fix APLL calculate formula for ast2600-A2 > > > > On Mon, 2021-01-18 at 18:08 +0800, Ryan Chen wrote: > > > AST2600A1/A2 have different pll calculate formula. > > > > To clarify, only the A0 has the old calculation, and all subsequent revisions use > > the new calculation? > > > > If this is the case, do we need to support A0 in mainline linux, or should we > > drop support for A0 and only support A1, A2 and onwards? > > > A0/A1 is use older calculate formula > After A2 is new calculate formula as the patch. Thanks for clarifying. I suggest you change the commit log to say something like this: Starting from A2, the A-PLL calculation has changed. Use the existing formula for A0/A1 and the new formula for A2 onwards. > > > You should add a line to indicate this is a fix: > > > > Fixes: d3d04f6c330a ("clk: Add support for AST2600 SoC") > > > Got it. so should I send new patch? Yes, please consider adjusting the commit message as I suggested above, and add the fixes line. > > > + u32 chip_id = readl(scu_g6_base + ASPEED_G6_SILICON_REV); > > > > > > - if (val & BIT(20)) { > > > - /* Pass through mode */ > > > - mult = div = 1; > > > + if (((chip_id & CHIP_REVISION_ID) >> 16) >= 2) { Will this test be true if there are future versions of the chip (A3, etc)? Cheers, Joel