Re: [PATCH v3 5/8] clk: sunxi-ng: nkm: Support finding closest rate

[Maxime Ripard]

On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:17:43AM +0200, Frank Oltmanns wrote:
> 
> On 2023-07-02 at 19:55:24 +0200, Frank Oltmanns <frank@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > When finding the best rate for a NKM clock, consider rates that are
> > higher than the requested rate, if the CCU_FEATURE_CLOSEST_RATE flag is
> > set.
> >
> > Accommodate ccu_mux_helper_determine_rate to this change.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Frank Oltmanns <frank@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_mux.c | 23 +++++++++++++++-----
> >  drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_nkm.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> >  2 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_mux.c b/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_mux.c
> > index 1d557e323169..8594d6a4addd 100644
> > --- a/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_mux.c
> > +++ b/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_mux.c
> > @@ -113,7 +113,7 @@ int ccu_mux_helper_determine_rate(struct ccu_common *common,
> >  	}
> >
> >  	for (i = 0; i < clk_hw_get_num_parents(hw); i++) {
> > -		unsigned long tmp_rate, parent_rate;
> > +		unsigned long tmp_rate, parent_rate, best_diff = ULONG_MAX;
> >  		struct clk_hw *parent;
> >
> >  		parent = clk_hw_get_parent_by_index(hw, i);
> > @@ -139,10 +139,23 @@ int ccu_mux_helper_determine_rate(struct ccu_common *common,
> >  			goto out;
> >  		}
> >
> > -		if ((req->rate - tmp_rate) < (req->rate - best_rate)) {
> > -			best_rate = tmp_rate;
> > -			best_parent_rate = parent_rate;
> > -			best_parent = parent;
> > +		if (common->features & CCU_FEATURE_CLOSEST_RATE) {
> > +			unsigned long tmp_diff = req->rate > tmp_rate ?
> > +						 req->rate - tmp_rate :
> > +						 tmp_rate - req->rate;
> > +
> > +			if (tmp_diff < best_diff) {
> > +				best_rate = tmp_rate;
> > +				best_parent_rate = parent_rate;
> > +				best_parent = parent;
> > +				best_diff = tmp_diff;
> > +			}
> > +		} else {
> > +			if ((req->rate - tmp_rate) < (req->rate - best_rate)) {
> > +				best_rate = tmp_rate;
> > +				best_parent_rate = parent_rate;
> > +				best_parent = parent;
> > +			}
> >  		}
> >  	}
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_nkm.c b/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_nkm.c
> > index d83843e69c25..36d9e987e4d8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_nkm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu_nkm.c
> > @@ -18,9 +18,11 @@ struct _ccu_nkm {
> >  };
> >
> >  static unsigned long ccu_nkm_find_best_with_parent_adj(unsigned long *parent, unsigned long rate,
> > -						       struct _ccu_nkm *nkm, struct clk_hw *phw)
> > +						       struct _ccu_nkm *nkm, struct clk_hw *phw,
> > +						       unsigned long features)
> >  {
> > -	unsigned long best_rate = 0, best_parent_rate = *parent, tmp_parent = *parent;
> > +	unsigned long best_rate = 0, best_parent_rate = 0, tmp_parent = *parent;
> > +	unsigned long best_diff = ULONG_MAX;
> >  	unsigned long best_n = 0, best_k = 0, best_m = 0;
> >  	unsigned long _n, _k, _m;
> >
> > @@ -28,16 +30,26 @@ static unsigned long ccu_nkm_find_best_with_parent_adj(unsigned long *parent, un
> >  		for (_n = nkm->min_n; _n <= nkm->max_n; _n++) {
> >  			for (_m = nkm->min_m; _m <= nkm->max_m; _m++) {
> >  				unsigned long tmp_rate;
> > +				unsigned long tmp_diff;
> >
> >  				tmp_parent = clk_hw_round_rate(phw, rate * _m / (_n * _k));
> >
> >  				tmp_rate = tmp_parent * _n * _k / _m;
> > -				if (tmp_rate > rate)
> > -					continue;
> >
> > -				if ((rate - tmp_rate) < (rate - best_rate)) {
> > +				if (features & CCU_FEATURE_CLOSEST_RATE) {
> > +					tmp_diff = rate > tmp_rate ?
> > +						   rate - tmp_rate :
> > +						   tmp_rate - rate;
> > +				} else {
> > +					if (tmp_rate > rate)
> > +						continue;
> > +					tmp_diff = rate - tmp_diff;
> 
> Sorry, this should of course be tmp_diff = rate - tmp_rate. I'll fix
> that in v4. Also I'll do tests on my phone where
> CCU_FEATURE_CLOSEST_RATE is not set (i.e., without PATCH 8), so see if
> it replicates the old behaviour. I'll also look into adding kunit tests,
> so that this doesn't happen again. I'm not sure if this is feasible, but
> I'll ask here for advise, if/when I encounter obstacles.

While this would obviously be great, I don't think we have the
infrastructure just yet to allow to easily add kunit tests for entire
clocks.

Maxime

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature