[PATCH v3 01/20] clk: shmobile: r8a7779: Add clocks support

[Simon Horman]

On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 10:06:06AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Simon Horman <horms at verge.net.au> wrote:
> >> > +/*
> >> > + *             MD1 = 1                 MD1 = 0
> >> > + *             (PLLA = 1500)           (PLLA = 1600)
> >> > + *             (MHz)                   (MHz)
> >> > + *------------------------------------------------+--------------------
> >> > + * clkz                1000   (2/3)            800   (1/2)
> >> > + * clkzs        250   (1/6)            200   (1/8)
> >> > + * clki                 750   (1/2)            800   (1/2)
> >> > + * clks                 250   (1/6)            200   (1/8)
> >> > + * clks1        125   (1/12)           100   (1/16)
> >> > + * clks3        187.5 (1/8)            200   (1/8)
> >> > + * clks4         93.7 (1/16)           100   (1/16)
> >> > + * clkp                  62.5 (1/24)            50   (1/32)
> >> > + * clkg                  62.5 (1/24)            66.6 (1/24)
> >> > + * clkb, CLKOUT
> >> > + * (MD2 = 0)     62.5 (1/24)            66.6 (1/24)
> >> > + * (MD2 = 1)     41.6 (1/36)            50   (1/32)
> >> > + */
> >> > +
> >> > +#define CPG_CLK_CONFIG_INDEX(md)       (((md) & (BIT(1)|BIT(2))) >> 1)
> >> > +
> >> > +struct cpg_clk_config {
> >> > +       unsigned int z_mult;
> >> > +       unsigned int z_div;
> >> > +       unsigned int zs_and_s_div;
> >> > +       unsigned int s1_div;
> >> > +       unsigned int p_div;
> >> > +       unsigned int out_div;
> >> > +};
> >> > +
> >> > +static const struct cpg_clk_config cpg_clk_configs[4] __initconst = {
> >> > +       { 1, 2, 8, 16, 32, 24 },
> >> > +       { 1, 2, 8, 16, 32, 24 },
> >> > +       { 2, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36 },
> >> > +       { 2, 3, 6, 12, 24, 32 },
> >> > +};
> >>
> >> Shouldn't this be
> >>
> >> +static const struct cpg_clk_config cpg_clk_configs[4] __initconst = {
> >> +       { 1, 2, 8, 16, 32, 24 },
> >> +       { 2, 3, 6, 12, 24, 24 },
> >> +       { 1, 2, 8, 16, 32, 32 },
> >> +       { 2, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36 },
> >> +};
> >>
> >> ?
> >>
> >> I think you got confused by writing the bitmask as "BIT(1)|BIT(2)" instead
> >> of "BIT(2)|BIT(1)".
> >
> > Probably, thanks for noticing.
> 
> Note that I based my review on the table above, not on the actual datasheet.

Understood. I'll double check the datasheet against my code and your comment.