Message ID | 20221028074826.2317640-1-luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers |
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org> Delivered-To: ouuuleilei@gmail.com Received: by 2002:a5d:6687:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id l7csp687625wru; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 01:06:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM5tUXJgnzOd08cFwzmAvZCcmdxRwqDFKAh6/PX+uju340R7zJ/J6VNyKueC73fwSf1CsQUz X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:ec8e:b0:186:f4ba:a7fc with SMTP id x14-20020a170902ec8e00b00186f4baa7fcmr4554878plg.55.1666944372550; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 01:06:12 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1666944372; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=c8YxRJuEnCkH4Ed3R/+aQJLQvrKFpSoz3WOkUMGOj3B3OvSPdzL0RgAySeGP/6HBI9 0q+YeTBRaoTSBe5CC1+CmA9u3GyWIZXxOegsXxkECgTQDqhhQS1IwsmkINLqWMMjtD+8 tihVjrMYwUn5gMLH8T3cssa4+LJihy3dCCsxx741owLUZT6Vh/H9mmadOjroGpsvg3oU pjybN8XxyHV0YAYbAi7kODcI03soSlhngRMtvzK9gzc1ojk8FLbEuUSeCrnOjRTB628z /+vSSDsS5mA+O7+mVU5Vaz5nA58HP9Eyhug4ILxQwbEXfdb79iljOweOk8djMOY8CLj7 Eerw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:dkim-signature; bh=m0oOZ7l6RvS8VTaNyT1SmYC8MhtuXGooOBg79bTfEm4=; b=zNGG0/7RJlFjiemMjENN9dOkkTjSVrtv3XAPOCRBxHVXi41S2B6JGTers5E77g59hX zHMqdws1KQjDEig3V1YI876eoctckkU8jS7GgCO9C8h0ydw+ZR+nU5mXLwWy1PbzRMzF 1iPxQzLCzzLICH27a/1wFXFInqYgT4tkQ5gcdn+/TuVxYI1LruPqiQrHn5mBLwxBjbnY qJ12pvrax3z/RJUudu6Qg+UceVbFe49OCXo29IWIsU+dg1Mj8tucHA7LJLaGv47UmBe+ ysVq7bSrLttdWclI4iN1i251wPIcGn4WkS1BEdB/DxFqhoggmBmmgNLa9QjAwBQCVGLy 3pIg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@bootlin.com header.s=gm1 header.b=mdVRAKjA; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=bootlin.com Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id y13-20020a170902cacd00b00176db576db9si3885274pld.275.2022.10.28.01.05.59; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 01:06:12 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@bootlin.com header.s=gm1 header.b=mdVRAKjA; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=bootlin.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229588AbiJ1HtT (ORCPT <rfc822;chrisfriedt@gmail.com> + 99 others); Fri, 28 Oct 2022 03:49:19 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37292 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229962AbiJ1HtQ (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>); Fri, 28 Oct 2022 03:49:16 -0400 Received: from relay5-d.mail.gandi.net (relay5-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.197]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E78419ABE7; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 00:49:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from booty.fritz.box (unknown [77.244.183.192]) (Authenticated sender: luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com) by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E92141C0002; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 07:49:11 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bootlin.com; s=gm1; t=1666943353; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding; bh=m0oOZ7l6RvS8VTaNyT1SmYC8MhtuXGooOBg79bTfEm4=; b=mdVRAKjAmqXAEtpaIwhfCi/rf7DHOZx/gC3jDRriH1FZY0O/hDmwlu+bQux9smX7b6AUm+ gOrFrbQPsVr0f5uwEPDH7ic7XQfK1SOJENmxclMb3XRhSs4Ngtj1ekQxQWp1p+RgjmDZMF t/5t7V9yhHbfKGUViZnGmgQ+WsDvoiUDTswTdvnMSneIY5A9QaKoqIzBCAP0ZMKMDtEI3E Cc66hEsNGMEwu7UHh49EEGNrroWaynC2/B2f+eFiXUrG7rIlEPD8H7lhXILaL4gW52z7O0 DDH5V5UoXFxKM3+oR7hryFXUVczlWTBXYAAFX4IsOHyeJBpuvNyZobLh0ik1Vg== From: luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com To: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org Cc: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com>, Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@nvidia.com>, Prashant Gaikwad <pgaikwad@nvidia.com>, Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>, Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH] clk: tegra: fix HOST1X clock divider on Tegra20 and Tegra30 Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 09:48:26 +0200 Message-Id: <20221028074826.2317640-1-luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.34.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org> X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org X-getmail-retrieved-from-mailbox: =?utf-8?q?INBOX?= X-GMAIL-THRID: =?utf-8?q?1747917862372296371?= X-GMAIL-MSGID: =?utf-8?q?1747917862372296371?= |
Series |
clk: tegra: fix HOST1X clock divider on Tegra20 and Tegra30
|
|
Commit Message
Luca Ceresoli
Oct. 28, 2022, 7:48 a.m. UTC
From: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com> On Tegra20 and Tegra30 the HOST1X clock is a fractional clock divider with 7 integer bits + 1 decimal bit. This has been verified on both documentation and real hardware for Tegra20 an on the documentation I was able to find for Tegra30. However in the kernel code this clock is declared as an integer divider. A consequence of this is that requesting 144 MHz for HOST1X which is fed by pll_p running at 216 MHz would result in 108 MHz (216 / 2) instead of 144 MHz (216 / 1.5). Fix by replacing the INT() macro with the MUX() macro which, despite the name, defines a fractional divider. The only difference between the two macros is the former does not have the TEGRA_DIVIDER_INT flag. Also move the line together with the other MUX*() ones to keep the existing file organization. Fixes: 76ebc134d45d ("clk: tegra: move periph clocks to common file") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Cc: Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@nvidia.com> Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com> --- drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Comments
On 10/28/22 10:48, luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com wrote: > From: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com> > > On Tegra20 and Tegra30 the HOST1X clock is a fractional clock divider with > 7 integer bits + 1 decimal bit. This has been verified on both > documentation and real hardware for Tegra20 an on the documentation I was > able to find for Tegra30. > > However in the kernel code this clock is declared as an integer divider. A > consequence of this is that requesting 144 MHz for HOST1X which is fed by > pll_p running at 216 MHz would result in 108 MHz (216 / 2) instead of 144 > MHz (216 / 1.5). > > Fix by replacing the INT() macro with the MUX() macro which, despite the > name, defines a fractional divider. The only difference between the two > macros is the former does not have the TEGRA_DIVIDER_INT flag. > > Also move the line together with the other MUX*() ones to keep the existing > file organization. > > Fixes: 76ebc134d45d ("clk: tegra: move periph clocks to common file") > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > Cc: Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@nvidia.com> > Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com> > --- > drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c b/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c > index 4dcf7f7cb8a0..806d835ca0d2 100644 > --- a/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c > +++ b/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c > @@ -615,7 +615,6 @@ static struct tegra_periph_init_data periph_clks[] = { > INT("vde", mux_pllp_pllc_pllm_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_VDE, 61, 0, tegra_clk_vde), > INT("vi", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI, 20, 0, tegra_clk_vi), > INT("epp", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_EPP, 19, 0, tegra_clk_epp), > - INT("host1x", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_HOST1X, 28, 0, tegra_clk_host1x), > INT("mpe", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_MPE, 60, 0, tegra_clk_mpe), > INT("2d", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_2D, 21, 0, tegra_clk_gr2d), > INT("3d", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_3D, 24, 0, tegra_clk_gr3d), > @@ -664,6 +663,7 @@ static struct tegra_periph_init_data periph_clks[] = { > MUX("owr", mux_pllp_pllc_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_OWR, 71, TEGRA_PERIPH_ON_APB, tegra_clk_owr_8), > MUX("nor", mux_pllp_pllc_pllm_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_NOR, 42, 0, tegra_clk_nor), > MUX("mipi", mux_pllp_pllc_pllm_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_MIPI, 50, TEGRA_PERIPH_ON_APB, tegra_clk_mipi), > + MUX("host1x", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_HOST1X, 28, 0, tegra_clk_host1x), > MUX("vi_sensor", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI_SENSOR, 20, TEGRA_PERIPH_NO_RESET, tegra_clk_vi_sensor), > MUX("vi_sensor", mux_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI_SENSOR, 20, TEGRA_PERIPH_NO_RESET, tegra_clk_vi_sensor_9), > MUX("cilab", mux_pllp_pllc_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_CILAB, 144, 0, tegra_clk_cilab), This was attempted in the past https://lore.kernel.org/all/20180723085010.GK1636@tbergstrom-lnx.Nvidia.com/ I assume here you're also porting the downstream patches to upstream. This one is too questionable. The host1x clock shouldn't affect overall performance to begin with. It doesn't make sense to use fractional clock just for getting extra KHz.
Hello Dmitry, On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 03:34:07 +0300 Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko@collabora.com> wrote: > On 10/28/22 10:48, luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com wrote: > > From: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com> > > > > On Tegra20 and Tegra30 the HOST1X clock is a fractional clock divider with > > 7 integer bits + 1 decimal bit. This has been verified on both > > documentation and real hardware for Tegra20 an on the documentation I was > > able to find for Tegra30. > > > > However in the kernel code this clock is declared as an integer divider. A > > consequence of this is that requesting 144 MHz for HOST1X which is fed by > > pll_p running at 216 MHz would result in 108 MHz (216 / 2) instead of 144 > > MHz (216 / 1.5). > > > > Fix by replacing the INT() macro with the MUX() macro which, despite the > > name, defines a fractional divider. The only difference between the two > > macros is the former does not have the TEGRA_DIVIDER_INT flag. > > > > Also move the line together with the other MUX*() ones to keep the existing > > file organization. > > > > Fixes: 76ebc134d45d ("clk: tegra: move periph clocks to common file") > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > Cc: Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@nvidia.com> > > Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com> > > --- > > drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c b/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c > > index 4dcf7f7cb8a0..806d835ca0d2 100644 > > --- a/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c > > +++ b/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c > > @@ -615,7 +615,6 @@ static struct tegra_periph_init_data periph_clks[] = { > > INT("vde", mux_pllp_pllc_pllm_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_VDE, 61, 0, tegra_clk_vde), > > INT("vi", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI, 20, 0, tegra_clk_vi), > > INT("epp", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_EPP, 19, 0, tegra_clk_epp), > > - INT("host1x", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_HOST1X, 28, 0, tegra_clk_host1x), > > INT("mpe", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_MPE, 60, 0, tegra_clk_mpe), > > INT("2d", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_2D, 21, 0, tegra_clk_gr2d), > > INT("3d", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_3D, 24, 0, tegra_clk_gr3d), > > @@ -664,6 +663,7 @@ static struct tegra_periph_init_data periph_clks[] = { > > MUX("owr", mux_pllp_pllc_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_OWR, 71, TEGRA_PERIPH_ON_APB, tegra_clk_owr_8), > > MUX("nor", mux_pllp_pllc_pllm_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_NOR, 42, 0, tegra_clk_nor), > > MUX("mipi", mux_pllp_pllc_pllm_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_MIPI, 50, TEGRA_PERIPH_ON_APB, tegra_clk_mipi), > > + MUX("host1x", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_HOST1X, 28, 0, tegra_clk_host1x), > > MUX("vi_sensor", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI_SENSOR, 20, TEGRA_PERIPH_NO_RESET, tegra_clk_vi_sensor), > > MUX("vi_sensor", mux_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI_SENSOR, 20, TEGRA_PERIPH_NO_RESET, tegra_clk_vi_sensor_9), > > MUX("cilab", mux_pllp_pllc_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_CILAB, 144, 0, tegra_clk_cilab), > > This was attempted in the past > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20180723085010.GK1636@tbergstrom-lnx.Nvidia.com/ > > I assume here you're also porting the downstream patches to upstream. > This one is too questionable. The host1x clock shouldn't affect overall > performance to begin with. It doesn't make sense to use fractional clock > just for getting extra KHz. Thank you for the review and for the pointer! Indeed I'm not sure this patch brings an actual improvement to my use case, however I reached it by trying to replicate the configuration on a known-working kernel 3.1, which uses a 1.5 divider. This seems to be the same reason that led to the 2018 patch that also got rejected. I'll be OK with dropping this patch after I have a 100% working setup with an integer divider, which is very likely given your reply. But it took time before I found the root cause of this issue, and I would like to avoid other people waste time in the future, so what about adding a comment there? What about: /* * The host1x clock shouldn't affect overall performance. It doesn't * make sense to use fractional clock just for getting extra KHz, so * let's pretend it's an integer divider */ ?
On 11/2/22 11:32, Luca Ceresoli wrote: > Hello Dmitry, > > On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 03:34:07 +0300 > Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko@collabora.com> wrote: > >> On 10/28/22 10:48, luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com wrote: >>> From: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com> >>> >>> On Tegra20 and Tegra30 the HOST1X clock is a fractional clock divider with >>> 7 integer bits + 1 decimal bit. This has been verified on both >>> documentation and real hardware for Tegra20 an on the documentation I was >>> able to find for Tegra30. >>> >>> However in the kernel code this clock is declared as an integer divider. A >>> consequence of this is that requesting 144 MHz for HOST1X which is fed by >>> pll_p running at 216 MHz would result in 108 MHz (216 / 2) instead of 144 >>> MHz (216 / 1.5). >>> >>> Fix by replacing the INT() macro with the MUX() macro which, despite the >>> name, defines a fractional divider. The only difference between the two >>> macros is the former does not have the TEGRA_DIVIDER_INT flag. >>> >>> Also move the line together with the other MUX*() ones to keep the existing >>> file organization. >>> >>> Fixes: 76ebc134d45d ("clk: tegra: move periph clocks to common file") >>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >>> Cc: Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@nvidia.com> >>> Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c b/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c >>> index 4dcf7f7cb8a0..806d835ca0d2 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c >>> +++ b/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c >>> @@ -615,7 +615,6 @@ static struct tegra_periph_init_data periph_clks[] = { >>> INT("vde", mux_pllp_pllc_pllm_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_VDE, 61, 0, tegra_clk_vde), >>> INT("vi", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI, 20, 0, tegra_clk_vi), >>> INT("epp", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_EPP, 19, 0, tegra_clk_epp), >>> - INT("host1x", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_HOST1X, 28, 0, tegra_clk_host1x), >>> INT("mpe", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_MPE, 60, 0, tegra_clk_mpe), >>> INT("2d", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_2D, 21, 0, tegra_clk_gr2d), >>> INT("3d", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_3D, 24, 0, tegra_clk_gr3d), >>> @@ -664,6 +663,7 @@ static struct tegra_periph_init_data periph_clks[] = { >>> MUX("owr", mux_pllp_pllc_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_OWR, 71, TEGRA_PERIPH_ON_APB, tegra_clk_owr_8), >>> MUX("nor", mux_pllp_pllc_pllm_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_NOR, 42, 0, tegra_clk_nor), >>> MUX("mipi", mux_pllp_pllc_pllm_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_MIPI, 50, TEGRA_PERIPH_ON_APB, tegra_clk_mipi), >>> + MUX("host1x", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_HOST1X, 28, 0, tegra_clk_host1x), >>> MUX("vi_sensor", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI_SENSOR, 20, TEGRA_PERIPH_NO_RESET, tegra_clk_vi_sensor), >>> MUX("vi_sensor", mux_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI_SENSOR, 20, TEGRA_PERIPH_NO_RESET, tegra_clk_vi_sensor_9), >>> MUX("cilab", mux_pllp_pllc_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_CILAB, 144, 0, tegra_clk_cilab), >> >> This was attempted in the past >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20180723085010.GK1636@tbergstrom-lnx.Nvidia.com/ >> >> I assume here you're also porting the downstream patches to upstream. >> This one is too questionable. The host1x clock shouldn't affect overall >> performance to begin with. It doesn't make sense to use fractional clock >> just for getting extra KHz. > > Thank you for the review and for the pointer! > > Indeed I'm not sure this patch brings an actual improvement to my use > case, however I reached it by trying to replicate the configuration on > a known-working kernel 3.1, which uses a 1.5 divider. This seems to be > the same reason that led to the 2018 patch that also got rejected. > > I'll be OK with dropping this patch after I have a 100% working setup > with an integer divider, which is very likely given your reply. But it > took time before I found the root cause of this issue, and I would like > to avoid other people waste time in the future, so what about adding a > comment there? > > What about: > > /* > * The host1x clock shouldn't affect overall performance. It doesn't > * make sense to use fractional clock just for getting extra KHz, so > * let's pretend it's an integer divider > */ If host1x isn't the only clock like that, then comment shouldn't be directed to host1x. Have you checked other clocks? I'm curious who made that change originally in your downstream, was it coming from NVIDIA?
Hi Dmitry, On Fri, 4 Nov 2022 00:44:16 +0300 Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko@collabora.com> wrote: > On 11/2/22 11:32, Luca Ceresoli wrote: > > Hello Dmitry, > > > > On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 03:34:07 +0300 > > Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko@collabora.com> wrote: > > > >> On 10/28/22 10:48, luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com wrote: > >>> From: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com> > >>> > >>> On Tegra20 and Tegra30 the HOST1X clock is a fractional clock divider with > >>> 7 integer bits + 1 decimal bit. This has been verified on both > >>> documentation and real hardware for Tegra20 an on the documentation I was > >>> able to find for Tegra30. > >>> > >>> However in the kernel code this clock is declared as an integer divider. A > >>> consequence of this is that requesting 144 MHz for HOST1X which is fed by > >>> pll_p running at 216 MHz would result in 108 MHz (216 / 2) instead of 144 > >>> MHz (216 / 1.5). > >>> > >>> Fix by replacing the INT() macro with the MUX() macro which, despite the > >>> name, defines a fractional divider. The only difference between the two > >>> macros is the former does not have the TEGRA_DIVIDER_INT flag. > >>> > >>> Also move the line together with the other MUX*() ones to keep the existing > >>> file organization. > >>> > >>> Fixes: 76ebc134d45d ("clk: tegra: move periph clocks to common file") > >>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > >>> Cc: Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@nvidia.com> > >>> Signed-off-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@bootlin.com> > >>> --- > >>> drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c | 2 +- > >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c b/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c > >>> index 4dcf7f7cb8a0..806d835ca0d2 100644 > >>> --- a/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c > >>> +++ b/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c > >>> @@ -615,7 +615,6 @@ static struct tegra_periph_init_data periph_clks[] = { > >>> INT("vde", mux_pllp_pllc_pllm_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_VDE, 61, 0, tegra_clk_vde), > >>> INT("vi", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI, 20, 0, tegra_clk_vi), > >>> INT("epp", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_EPP, 19, 0, tegra_clk_epp), > >>> - INT("host1x", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_HOST1X, 28, 0, tegra_clk_host1x), > >>> INT("mpe", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_MPE, 60, 0, tegra_clk_mpe), > >>> INT("2d", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_2D, 21, 0, tegra_clk_gr2d), > >>> INT("3d", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_3D, 24, 0, tegra_clk_gr3d), > >>> @@ -664,6 +663,7 @@ static struct tegra_periph_init_data periph_clks[] = { > >>> MUX("owr", mux_pllp_pllc_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_OWR, 71, TEGRA_PERIPH_ON_APB, tegra_clk_owr_8), > >>> MUX("nor", mux_pllp_pllc_pllm_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_NOR, 42, 0, tegra_clk_nor), > >>> MUX("mipi", mux_pllp_pllc_pllm_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_MIPI, 50, TEGRA_PERIPH_ON_APB, tegra_clk_mipi), > >>> + MUX("host1x", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_HOST1X, 28, 0, tegra_clk_host1x), > >>> MUX("vi_sensor", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI_SENSOR, 20, TEGRA_PERIPH_NO_RESET, tegra_clk_vi_sensor), > >>> MUX("vi_sensor", mux_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI_SENSOR, 20, TEGRA_PERIPH_NO_RESET, tegra_clk_vi_sensor_9), > >>> MUX("cilab", mux_pllp_pllc_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_CILAB, 144, 0, tegra_clk_cilab), > >> > >> This was attempted in the past > >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20180723085010.GK1636@tbergstrom-lnx.Nvidia.com/ > >> > >> I assume here you're also porting the downstream patches to upstream. > >> This one is too questionable. The host1x clock shouldn't affect overall > >> performance to begin with. It doesn't make sense to use fractional clock > >> just for getting extra KHz. > > > > Thank you for the review and for the pointer! > > > > Indeed I'm not sure this patch brings an actual improvement to my use > > case, however I reached it by trying to replicate the configuration on > > a known-working kernel 3.1, which uses a 1.5 divider. This seems to be > > the same reason that led to the 2018 patch that also got rejected. > > > > I'll be OK with dropping this patch after I have a 100% working setup > > with an integer divider, which is very likely given your reply. But it > > took time before I found the root cause of this issue, and I would like > > to avoid other people waste time in the future, so what about adding a > > comment there? > > > > What about: > > > > /* > > * The host1x clock shouldn't affect overall performance. It doesn't > > * make sense to use fractional clock just for getting extra KHz, so > > * let's pretend it's an integer divider > > */ > > If host1x isn't the only clock like that, then comment shouldn't be > directed to host1x. Have you checked other clocks? No, apologies, I don't know enough about this SoC to be able to put into a comment anything interesting other than what you wrote in your previous reply. > I'm curious who made that change originally in your downstream, was it > coming from NVIDIA? It is coming from our customer, not sure where they got it initially, but this is the commit where it was added, with a DIV_U71 flag: https://osdn.net/projects/android-x86/scm/git/kernel/commits/d861196163e30c07add471562b45dce38517c9b2
diff --git a/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c b/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c index 4dcf7f7cb8a0..806d835ca0d2 100644 --- a/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c +++ b/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra-periph.c @@ -615,7 +615,6 @@ static struct tegra_periph_init_data periph_clks[] = { INT("vde", mux_pllp_pllc_pllm_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_VDE, 61, 0, tegra_clk_vde), INT("vi", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI, 20, 0, tegra_clk_vi), INT("epp", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_EPP, 19, 0, tegra_clk_epp), - INT("host1x", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_HOST1X, 28, 0, tegra_clk_host1x), INT("mpe", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_MPE, 60, 0, tegra_clk_mpe), INT("2d", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_2D, 21, 0, tegra_clk_gr2d), INT("3d", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_3D, 24, 0, tegra_clk_gr3d), @@ -664,6 +663,7 @@ static struct tegra_periph_init_data periph_clks[] = { MUX("owr", mux_pllp_pllc_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_OWR, 71, TEGRA_PERIPH_ON_APB, tegra_clk_owr_8), MUX("nor", mux_pllp_pllc_pllm_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_NOR, 42, 0, tegra_clk_nor), MUX("mipi", mux_pllp_pllc_pllm_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_MIPI, 50, TEGRA_PERIPH_ON_APB, tegra_clk_mipi), + MUX("host1x", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_HOST1X, 28, 0, tegra_clk_host1x), MUX("vi_sensor", mux_pllm_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI_SENSOR, 20, TEGRA_PERIPH_NO_RESET, tegra_clk_vi_sensor), MUX("vi_sensor", mux_pllc_pllp_plla, CLK_SOURCE_VI_SENSOR, 20, TEGRA_PERIPH_NO_RESET, tegra_clk_vi_sensor_9), MUX("cilab", mux_pllp_pllc_clkm, CLK_SOURCE_CILAB, 144, 0, tegra_clk_cilab),