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=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 2E9AEC282CC for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2019 09:36:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0133F20880 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2019 09:36:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=amarulasolutions.com header.i=@amarulasolutions.com header.b="AY7yun73" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726804AbfA1JgX (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2019 04:36:23 -0500 Received: from mail-it1-f193.google.com ([209.85.166.193]:37176 "EHLO mail-it1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726668AbfA1JgX (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2019 04:36:23 -0500 Received: by mail-it1-f193.google.com with SMTP id b5so18395849iti.2 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2019 01:36:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=amarulasolutions.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Ozesp4rWwiinrHtP2lbjF0VXem3poIT2No6pvmp0vP4=; b=AY7yun73QD+EMNMwN0Y9/iGld70czBDXBhZwOgwRagFJXGF4+NVDKL7UmP/oFwxqMa bx3rn5BaL6yp5Cf4amrzXIkfjukg6OKP6aXwgTM0QqGO5rzZ41224LwdVvL3SHWhpBL2 aR2HTIR8GnB108wOYdYBcqWMpVgeDWctVrae4= 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=Ozesp4rWwiinrHtP2lbjF0VXem3poIT2No6pvmp0vP4=; b=ODbBQ4qamB2WarUTHDdx9p586v/j1CBOlJ03LBP4y2lpmyjdwQQeskhuBx/WtjrcVY GDua9a5JLlyFyGOoWDOlkFwSJGgb689GFu0SK0vly8iC52giquPzF0xE5jtfe4Zcd+aT AbeNuC1Fzy3CB/oZTXjCtcHAamtSD9fGLzvfRSwbWHC/uNx7H977AwYOzITy5L1gPvBg kiSbZTAuOXry0sGHLh36OVT0tCC4JQa17BvBM+6HMEbsuKss9CxrNm+WRdZsFUr4J1ab /GC4vMxVgFd4SjDeDQGat7RPY2XzB53kABp8Zb4CUIYLRu/osuKME+RTXOkdfCcnQSK/ I64g== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukegBk/iW6lfKYigTmO3Pp3S9Ng0qouAU/Ak1bs2ophlC5WbIzzS S43NLBbOTxMJqEvo46BIcGsfBCk7tr2lncezJNrymg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN6pbH8aim/d9XQIpdNF6Ci4nzcWf2S1jjcKEHd6gLiFxhxCMBZ3bZKyOFJKx+7PoFzRn8eTtVwDlkiO4D5JUu4= X-Received: by 2002:a02:781e:: with SMTP id p30mr13465792jac.85.1548668181627; Mon, 28 Jan 2019 01:36:21 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190124195900.22620-1-jagan@amarulasolutions.com> <20190124195900.22620-12-jagan@amarulasolutions.com> <20190125212433.ni2jg3wvpyjazlxf@flea> In-Reply-To: <20190125212433.ni2jg3wvpyjazlxf@flea> From: Jagan Teki Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 15:06:10 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 11/22] clk: sunxi-ng: a64: Add minimum rate for PLL_MIPI To: Maxime Ripard Cc: David Airlie , Daniel Vetter , Chen-Yu Tsai , Michael Turquette , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , linux-arm-kernel , linux-kernel , linux-clk , dri-devel , devicetree , Michael Trimarchi , linux-amarula@amarulasolutions.com, linux-sunxi Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 2:54 AM Maxime Ripard wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 01:28:49AM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote: > > Minimum PLL used for MIPI is 500MHz, as per manual, but > > lowering the min rate by 300MHz can result proper working > > nkms divider with the help of desired dclock rate from > > panel driver. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki > > Acked-by: Stephen Boyd > > Going 200MHz below the minimum doesn't seem really reasonable. What > is the issue that you are trying to fix here? > > It looks like it's picking bad dividers, but if that's the case, this > isn't the proper fix. As I stated in earlier patches, the whole idea is pick the desired dclk divider based dclk rate. So the dotclock, sun4i_dclk_round_rate is unable to get the proper dclk divider at the end, so it eventually picking up wrong divider value and fired vblank timeout. So, we come-up with optimal and working min_rate 300MHz in pll-mipi to get the desired clock something like below. [ 2.415773] [drm] No driver support for vblank timestamp query. [ 2.424116] sun4i_dclk_round_rate: min_div = 4 max_div = 127, rate = 55000000 [ 2.424172] ideal = 220000000, rounded = 0 [ 2.424176] ideal = 275000000, rounded = 0 [ 2.424194] ccu_nkm_round_rate: rate = 330000000 [ 2.424197] ideal = 330000000, rounded = 330000000 [ 2.424201] sun4i_dclk_round_rate: div = 6 rate = 55000000 [ 2.424205] sun4i_dclk_round_rate: min_div = 4 max_div = 127, rate = 55000000 [ 2.424209] ideal = 220000000, rounded = 0 [ 2.424213] ideal = 275000000, rounded = 0 [ 2.424230] ccu_nkm_round_rate: rate = 330000000 [ 2.424233] ideal = 330000000, rounded = 330000000 [ 2.424236] sun4i_dclk_round_rate: div = 6 rate = 55000000 [ 2.424253] ccu_nkm_round_rate: rate = 330000000 [ 2.424270] ccu_nkm_round_rate: rate = 330000000 [ 2.424278] sun4i_dclk_recalc_rate: val = 1, rate = 330000000 [ 2.424281] sun4i_dclk_recalc_rate: val = 1, rate = 330000000 [ 2.424306] ccu_nkm_set_rate: rate = 330000000, parent_rate = 297000000 [ 2.424309] ccu_nkm_set_rate: _nkm.n = 5 [ 2.424311] ccu_nkm_set_rate: _nkm.k = 2 [ 2.424313] ccu_nkm_set_rate: _nkm.m = 9 [ 2.424661] sun4i_dclk_set_rate div 6 [ 2.424668] sun4i_dclk_recalc_rate: val = 6, rate = 55000000 But look like this wouldn't valid for all other dclock rates, say BPI panel has 30MHz clock that would failed with this logic. On the other side Allwinner BSP calculating dclk divider based on the SoC's. for A33 [1] it is fixed dclk divider of 4 and for A64 is is calculated based on the bpp/lanes. Since the above min_rate is not desired for possible panels clock, I think we can rely on BSP to make a move here. I'm planning to do these changes in next version. Let me know if you have any comments here? [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10777519/