linux-stable.git/drivers/clk, branch v4.14.45

clk: samsung: exynos3250: Fix PLL rates

2018-05-25T14:17:55+00:00

[ Upstream commit a8321e7887410a2b2e80ab89d1ef7b30562658ea ]

Rates declared in PLL rate tables should match exactly rates calculated
from PLL coefficients. If that is not the case, rate of the PLL's child clock
might be set not as expected. For instance, if in the PLL rates table we have
a 393216000 Hz entry and the real value as returned by the PLL's recalc_rate
callback is 393216003, after setting PLL's clk rate to 393216000 clk_get_rate
will return 393216003. If we now attempt to set rate of a PLL's child divider
clock to 393216000/2 its rate will be 131072001, rather than 196608000.
That is, the divider will be set to 3 instead of 2, because 393216003/2 is
greater than 196608000.

To fix this issue declared rates are changed to exactly match rates generated
by the PLL, as calculated from the P, M, S, K coefficients.

In this patch an erroneous P value for 74176002 output frequency is also
corrected.

Signed-off-by: Andrzej Hajda 
Acked-by: Chanwoo Choi 
Acked-by: Tomasz Figa 
Signed-off-by: Sylwester Nawrocki 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

clk: samsung: exynos5250: Fix PLL rates

2018-05-25T14:17:54+00:00

[ Upstream commit 2ac051eeabaa411ef89ae7cd5bb8e60cb41ad780 ]

Rates declared in PLL rate tables should match exactly rates calculated
from PLL coefficients. If that is not the case, rate of the PLL's child clock
might be set not as expected. For instance, if in the PLL rates table we have
a 393216000 Hz entry and the real value as returned by the PLL's recalc_rate
callback is 393216003, after setting PLL's clk rate to 393216000 clk_get_rate
will return 393216003. If we now attempt to set rate of a PLL's child divider
clock to 393216000/2 its rate will be 131072001, rather than 196608000.
That is, the divider will be set to 3 instead of 2, because 393216003/2 is
greater than 196608000.

To fix this issue declared rates are changed to exactly match rates generated
by the PLL, as calculated from the P, M, S, K coefficients.

Signed-off-by: Andrzej Hajda 
Acked-by: Chanwoo Choi 
Acked-by: Tomasz Figa 
Signed-off-by: Sylwester Nawrocki 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

clk: samsung: exynos5433: Fix PLL rates

2018-05-25T14:17:54+00:00

[ Upstream commit ab0447845cffc0fd752df2ccd6b4e34006000ce4 ]

Rates declared in PLL rate tables should match exactly rates calculated from
the PLL coefficients. If that is not the case, rate of the PLL's child clock
might be set not as expected. For instance, if in the PLL rates table we have
a 393216000 Hz entry and the real value as returned by the PLL's recalc_rate
callback is 393216003, after setting PLL's clk rate to 393216000 clk_get_rate
will return 393216003. If we now attempt to set rate of a PLL's child divider
clock to 393216000/2 its rate will be 131072001, rather than 196608000.
That is, the divider will be set to 3 instead of 2, because 393216003/2 is
greater than 196608000.

To fix this issue declared rates are changed to exactly match rates generated
by the PLL, as calculated from the P, M, S, K coefficients.

Signed-off-by: Andrzej Hajda 
Acked-by: Tomasz Figa 
Acked-by: Chanwoo Choi 
Signed-off-by: Sylwester Nawrocki 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

clk: samsung: exynos5260: Fix PLL rates

2018-05-25T14:17:54+00:00

[ Upstream commit cdb68fbd4e7962be742c4f29475220c5bf28d8a5 ]

Rates declared in PLL rate tables should match exactly rates calculated from
the PLL coefficients. If that is not the case, rate of the PLL's child clock
might be set not as expected. For instance, if in the PLL rates table we have
a 393216000 Hz entry and the real value as returned by the PLL's recalc_rate
callback is 393216003, after setting PLL's clk rate to 393216000 clk_get_rate
will return 393216003. If we now attempt to set rate of a PLL's child divider
clock to 393216000/2 its rate will be 131072001, rather than 196608000.
That is, the divider will be set to 3 instead of 2, because 393216003/2 is
greater than 196608000.

To fix this issue declared rates are changed to exactly match rates generated
by the PLL, as calculated from the P, M, S, K coefficients.

Signed-off-by: Andrzej Hajda 
Acked-by: Tomasz Figa 
Acked-by: Chanwoo Choi 
Signed-off-by: Sylwester Nawrocki 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

clk: samsung: exynos7: Fix PLL rates

2018-05-25T14:17:54+00:00

[ Upstream commit 7e4db0c2836e892766565965207eee051c8037b9 ]

Rates declared in PLL rate tables should match exactly rates calculated from
the PLL coefficients. If that is not the case, rate of the PLL's child clock
might be set not as expected. For instance, if in the PLL rates table we have
a 393216000 Hz entry and the real value as returned by the PLL's recalc_rate
callback is 393216003, after setting PLL's clk rate to 393216000 clk_get_rate
will return 393216003. If we now attempt to set rate of a PLL's child divider
clock to 393216000/2 its rate will be 131072001, rather than 196608000.
That is, the divider will be set to 3 instead of 2, because 393216003/2 is
greater than 196608000.

To fix this issue declared rates are changed to exactly match rates generated
by the PLL, as calculated from the P, M, S, K coefficients.

Signed-off-by: Andrzej Hajda 
Acked-by: Tomasz Figa 
Acked-by: Chanwoo Choi 
Signed-off-by: Sylwester Nawrocki 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

clk: samsung: s3c2410: Fix PLL rates

2018-05-25T14:17:54+00:00

[ Upstream commit 179db533c08431f509a3823077549773d519358b ]

Rates declared in PLL rate tables should match exactly rates calculated from
the PLL coefficients. If that is not the case, rate of the PLL's child clock
might be set not as expected. For instance, if in the PLL rates table we have
a 393216000 Hz entry and the real value as returned by the PLL's recalc_rate
callback is 393216003, after setting PLL's clk rate to 393216000 clk_get_rate
will return 393216003. If we now attempt to set rate of a PLL's child divider
clock to 393216000/2 its rate will be 131072001, rather than 196608000.
That is, the divider will be set to 3 instead of 2, because 393216003/2 is
greater than 196608000.

To fix this issue declared rates are changed to exactly match rates generated
by the PLL, as calculated from the P, M, S, K coefficients.

Signed-off-by: Andrzej Hajda 
Acked-by: Tomasz Figa 
Acked-by: Chanwoo Choi 
Signed-off-by: Sylwester Nawrocki 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

clk: rockchip: Prevent calculating mmc phase if clock rate is zero

2018-05-25T14:17:53+00:00

[ Upstream commit 4bf59902b50012b1dddeeaa23b217d9c4956cdda ]

The MMC sample and drv clock for rockchip platforms are derived from
the bus clock output to the MMC/SDIO card. So it should never happens
that the clk rate is zero given it should inherits the clock rate from
its parent. If something goes wrong and makes the clock rate to be zero,
the calculation would be wrong but may still make the mmc tuning process
work luckily. However it makes people harder to debug when the following
data transfer is unstable.

Signed-off-by: Shawn Lin 
Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

clk: tegra: Fix pll_u rate configuration

2018-05-25T14:17:53+00:00

[ Upstream commit c35b518f9ba06c9de79fb3ff62eed7462d804995 ]

Turns out latest upstream U-Boot does not configure/enable pll_u which
leaves it at some default rate of 500 kHz:

root@apalis-t30:~# cat /sys/kernel/debug/clk/clk_summary | grep pll_u
       pll_u                  3        3        0      500000          0

Of course this won't quite work leading to the following messages:

[    6.559593] usb 2-1: new full-speed USB device number 2 using tegra-
ehci
[   11.759173] usb 2-1: device descriptor read/64, error -110
[   27.119453] usb 2-1: device descriptor read/64, error -110
[   27.389217] usb 2-1: new full-speed USB device number 3 using tegra-
ehci
[   32.559454] usb 2-1: device descriptor read/64, error -110
[   47.929777] usb 2-1: device descriptor read/64, error -110
[   48.049658] usb usb2-port1: attempt power cycle
[   48.759475] usb 2-1: new full-speed USB device number 4 using tegra-
ehci
[   59.349457] usb 2-1: device not accepting address 4, error -110
[   59.509449] usb 2-1: new full-speed USB device number 5 using tegra-
ehci
[   70.069457] usb 2-1: device not accepting address 5, error -110
[   70.079721] usb usb2-port1: unable to enumerate USB device

Fix this by actually allowing the rate also being set from within
the Linux kernel.

Signed-off-by: Marcel Ziswiler 
Tested-by: Jon Hunter 
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

clk: hisilicon: mark wdt_mux_p[] as const

2018-05-25T14:17:53+00:00

[ Upstream commit df934cbcbff7afbc024bf05f02615917c61f6470 ]

The symbol is in the __initconst section but not marked init, which
caused a warning when building with LTO.

This makes it 'const' as was obviously intended.

Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann 
Fixes: c80dfd9bf54e ("clk: hisilicon: add CRG driver for Hi3516CV300 SoC")
Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

clk: Don't show the incorrect clock phase

2018-05-25T14:17:52+00:00

[ Upstream commit 1f9c63e8de3d7b377c9d74e4a17524cfb60e6384 ]

It's found that the clock phase output from clk_summary is
wrong compared to the actual phase reading from the register.

cat /sys/kernel/debug/clk/clk_summary | grep sdio_sample
sdio_sample     0        1        0 50000000          0 -22

It exposes an issue that clk core, clk_core_get_phase, always
returns the cached core->phase which should be either updated
by calling clk_set_phase or directly from the first place the
clk was registered.

When registering the clk, the core->phase geting from ->get_phase()
may return negative value indicating error. This is quite common
since the clk's phase may be highly related to its parent chain,
but it was temporarily orphan when registered, since its parent
chains hadn't be ready at that time, so the clk drivers decide to
return error in this case. However, if no clk_set_phase is called or
maybe the ->set_phase() isn't even implemented, the core->phase would
never be updated. This is wrong, and we should try to update it when
all its parent chains are settled down, like the way of updating clock
rate for that. But it's not deserved to complicate the code now and
just update it anyway when calling clk_core_get_phase, which would be
much simple and enough.

Signed-off-by: Shawn Lin 
Acked-by: Jerome Brunet 
Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd 
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin 
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman