mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com>
To: Yu Tu <yu.tu@amlogic.com>,
	linux-serial@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@kernel.org>,
	Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>,
	Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 3/5] tty: serial: meson: The UART baud rate
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 15:29:45 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1j8rvnps11.fsf@starbuckisacylon.baylibre.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220110085604.18042-4-yu.tu@amlogic.com>


On Mon 10 Jan 2022 at 16:56, Yu Tu <yu.tu@amlogic.com> wrote:

Title is bad (like several other patches in this series) - Please fix it

> Using the common Clock code to describe the UART baud rate clock
> makes it easier for the UART driver to be compatible with the
> baud rate requirements of the UART IP on different meson chips.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yu Tu <yu.tu@amlogic.com>
> ---
>  drivers/tty/serial/meson_uart.c | 224 +++++++++++++++++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 163 insertions(+), 61 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/meson_uart.c b/drivers/tty/serial/meson_uart.c
> index 7570958d010c..1004fd0b0c9e 100644
> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/meson_uart.c
> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/meson_uart.c
> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>   */
>  
>  #include <linux/clk.h>
> +#include <linux/clk-provider.h>
>  #include <linux/console.h>
>  #include <linux/delay.h>
>  #include <linux/init.h>
> @@ -65,9 +66,7 @@
>  #define AML_UART_RECV_IRQ(c)		((c) & 0xff)
>  
>  /* AML_UART_REG5 bits */
> -#define AML_UART_BAUD_MASK		0x7fffff
>  #define AML_UART_BAUD_USE		BIT(23)
> -#define AML_UART_BAUD_XTAL		BIT(24)
>  
>  #define AML_UART_PORT_NUM		12
>  #define AML_UART_PORT_OFFSET		6
> @@ -76,6 +75,13 @@
>  #define AML_UART_POLL_USEC		5
>  #define AML_UART_TIMEOUT_USEC		10000
>  
> +struct meson_uart_data {
> +	struct uart_port	port;
> +	struct clk		*pclk;
> +	struct clk		*baud_clk;
> +	bool			use_xtal_clk;
> +};
> +
>  static struct uart_driver meson_uart_driver;
>  
>  static struct uart_port *meson_ports[AML_UART_PORT_NUM];
> @@ -268,14 +274,11 @@ static void meson_uart_reset(struct uart_port *port)
>  static int meson_uart_startup(struct uart_port *port)
>  {
>  	u32 val;
> -	int ret = 0;
> +	int ret;
>  
> -	val = readl(port->membase + AML_UART_CONTROL);
> -	val |= AML_UART_CLEAR_ERR;
> -	writel(val, port->membase + AML_UART_CONTROL);
> -	val &= ~AML_UART_CLEAR_ERR;
> -	writel(val, port->membase + AML_UART_CONTROL);
> +	meson_uart_reset(port);
>  
> +	val = readl(port->membase + AML_UART_CONTROL);
>  	val |= (AML_UART_RX_EN | AML_UART_TX_EN);
>  	writel(val, port->membase + AML_UART_CONTROL);
>  
> @@ -293,19 +296,17 @@ static int meson_uart_startup(struct uart_port *port)
>  
>  static void meson_uart_change_speed(struct uart_port *port, unsigned long baud)
>  {
> +	struct meson_uart_data *private_data = port->private_data;
>  	u32 val;
>  
>  	while (!meson_uart_tx_empty(port))
>  		cpu_relax();
>  
> -	if (port->uartclk == 24000000) {
> -		val = ((port->uartclk / 3) / baud) - 1;
> -		val |= AML_UART_BAUD_XTAL;
> -	} else {
> -		val = ((port->uartclk * 10 / (baud * 4) + 5) / 10) - 1;
> -	}
> +	val = readl(port->membase + AML_UART_REG5);
>  	val |= AML_UART_BAUD_USE;
>  	writel(val, port->membase + AML_UART_REG5);
> +
> +	clk_set_rate(private_data->baud_clk, baud);
>  }
>  
>  static void meson_uart_set_termios(struct uart_port *port,
> @@ -395,11 +396,27 @@ static int meson_uart_verify_port(struct uart_port *port,
>  
>  static void meson_uart_release_port(struct uart_port *port)
>  {
> -	/* nothing to do */
> +	struct meson_uart_data *private_data = port->private_data;
> +
> +	clk_disable_unprepare(private_data->baud_clk);
> +	clk_disable_unprepare(private_data->pclk);
>  }
>  
>  static int meson_uart_request_port(struct uart_port *port)
>  {
> +	struct meson_uart_data *private_data = port->private_data;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = clk_prepare_enable(private_data->pclk);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;

In the previous version of the series, you already been asked to the
enable of pclk in the probe. Optimization should not be mixed with this
series

Please make sure all comments are addressed before re-posting

> +
> +	ret = clk_prepare_enable(private_data->baud_clk);
> +	if (ret) {
> +		clk_disable_unprepare(private_data->pclk);
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> @@ -629,55 +646,105 @@ static struct uart_driver meson_uart_driver = {
>  	.cons		= MESON_SERIAL_CONSOLE,
>  };
>  
> -static inline struct clk *meson_uart_probe_clock(struct device *dev,
> -						 const char *id)
> +#define CLK_NAME(name) \
> +({\
> +	char clk_name[32];\
> +	snprintf(clk_name, sizeof(clk_name), "%s#%s", dev_name(port->dev), #name);\
> +	clk_name;\
> +})

1) This result in some ugly code being inlined
2) You return a pointer a local variable which is not gurantee to exist
anymore  outside of this ...

Please do this simply in the related function.

> +
> +static struct clk_div_table xtal_div_table[] = {
> +	{ 0, 3  },
> +	{ 1, 1  },
> +	{ 2, 2  },
> +	{ 3, 2  },
> +};
> +
> +static int meson_uart_probe_clocks(struct uart_port *port)
>  {
> -	struct clk *clk = NULL;
> -	int ret;
> +	struct meson_uart_data *private_data = port->private_data;
> +	struct clk *clk_baud, *clk_xtal;
> +	struct clk_hw *hw;
> +	struct clk_parent_data use_xtal_mux_parents[2] = {
> +		{ .index = -1, },
> +		{ .index = -1, },
> +	};
>  
> -	clk = devm_clk_get(dev, id);
> -	if (IS_ERR(clk))
> -		return clk;
> +	private_data->pclk = devm_clk_get(port->dev, "pclk");
> +	if (IS_ERR(private_data->pclk))
> +		return dev_err_probe(port->dev, PTR_ERR(private_data->pclk),
> +				     "Failed to get the 'pclk' clock\n");
>  
> -	ret = clk_prepare_enable(clk);
> -	if (ret) {
> -		dev_err(dev, "couldn't enable clk\n");
> -		return ERR_PTR(ret);
> +	clk_baud = devm_clk_get(port->dev, "baud");
> +	if (IS_ERR(clk_baud)) {
> +		dev_err(port->dev, "Failed to get the 'baud' clock\n");
> +		return PTR_ERR(clk_baud);
>  	}
>  
> -	devm_add_action_or_reset(dev,
> -			(void(*)(void *))clk_disable_unprepare,
> -			clk);
> -
> -	return clk;
> -}
> -
> -static int meson_uart_probe_clocks(struct platform_device *pdev,
> -				   struct uart_port *port)
> -{
> -	struct clk *clk_xtal = NULL;
> -	struct clk *clk_pclk = NULL;
> -	struct clk *clk_baud = NULL;
> -
> -	clk_pclk = meson_uart_probe_clock(&pdev->dev, "pclk");
> -	if (IS_ERR(clk_pclk))
> -		return PTR_ERR(clk_pclk);
> -
> -	clk_xtal = meson_uart_probe_clock(&pdev->dev, "xtal");
> +	clk_xtal = devm_clk_get(port->dev, "xtal");
>  	if (IS_ERR(clk_xtal))
> -		return PTR_ERR(clk_xtal);
> -
> -	clk_baud = meson_uart_probe_clock(&pdev->dev, "baud");
> -	if (IS_ERR(clk_baud))
> -		return PTR_ERR(clk_baud);
> +		return dev_err_probe(port->dev, PTR_ERR(clk_xtal),
> +				     "Failed to get the 'xtal' clock\n");
> +
> +	if (private_data->use_xtal_clk) {
> +		hw = devm_clk_hw_register_divider_table(port->dev,
> +							CLK_NAME(xtal_div),
> +							__clk_get_name(clk_baud),
> +							CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT,
> +							port->membase + AML_UART_REG5,
> +							26, 2,
> +							CLK_DIVIDER_READ_ONLY,
> +							xtal_div_table, NULL);
> +		if (IS_ERR(hw))
> +			return PTR_ERR(hw);
> +
> +		use_xtal_mux_parents[1].hw = hw;
> +	} else {
> +		hw = devm_clk_hw_register_fixed_factor(port->dev,
> +						       CLK_NAME(clk81_div4),
> +						       __clk_get_name(clk_baud),
> +						       CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT,
> +						       1, 4);
> +		if (IS_ERR(hw))
> +			return PTR_ERR(hw);
> +
> +		use_xtal_mux_parents[0].hw = hw;
> +	}

Contradiction with previous series.
In the previous series we could clearly see that gxbb did not have the
/4 divider. It did not have bits 26 and 27 either.

Now gxbb get the /4 divider. It operated correctly without it so far, so
this is rather suspicious. Could you please comment on this ?

>  
> -	port->uartclk = clk_get_rate(clk_baud);
> +	hw = __devm_clk_hw_register_mux(port->dev, NULL,
> +					CLK_NAME(use_xtal),
> +					ARRAY_SIZE(use_xtal_mux_parents),
> +					NULL, NULL,
> +					use_xtal_mux_parents,
> +					CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> +					port->membase + AML_UART_REG5,
> +					24, 0x1,
> +					CLK_MUX_READ_ONLY,
> +					NULL, NULL);
> +	if (IS_ERR(hw))
> +		return PTR_ERR(hw);
> +
> +	port->uartclk = clk_hw_get_rate(hw);
> +
> +	hw = devm_clk_hw_register_divider(port->dev,
> +					  CLK_NAME(baud_div),
> +					  clk_hw_get_name(hw),
> +					  CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> +					  port->membase + AML_UART_REG5,
> +					  0, 23,
> +					  CLK_DIVIDER_ROUND_CLOSEST,
> +					  NULL);
> +	if (IS_ERR(hw))
> +		return PTR_ERR(hw);
> +
> +	private_data->baud_clk = clk_hw_get_clk(hw, "baud_rate");

I have already commented on the use of this function in the previous
version.

Please make sure all comments are addressed before re-posting

>  
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
>  static int meson_uart_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  {
> +	struct meson_uart_data *private_data;
>  	struct resource *res_mem;
>  	struct uart_port *port;
>  	u32 fifosize = 64; /* Default is 64, 128 for EE UART_0 */
> @@ -716,18 +783,20 @@ static int meson_uart_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  		return -EBUSY;
>  	}
>  
> -	port = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(struct uart_port), GFP_KERNEL);
> -	if (!port)
> +	private_data = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*private_data),
> +				    GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!private_data)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>  
> +	if (device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev))
> +		private_data->use_xtal_clk = true;
> +
> +	port = &private_data->port;
> +
>  	port->membase = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res_mem);
>  	if (IS_ERR(port->membase))
>  		return PTR_ERR(port->membase);
>  
> -	ret = meson_uart_probe_clocks(pdev, port);
> -	if (ret)
> -		return ret;
> -
>  	port->iotype = UPIO_MEM;
>  	port->mapbase = res_mem->start;
>  	port->mapsize = resource_size(res_mem);
> @@ -740,7 +809,11 @@ static int meson_uart_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	port->x_char = 0;
>  	port->ops = &meson_uart_ops;
>  	port->fifosize = fifosize;
> +	port->private_data = private_data;

port has private_data
private_data has port

Is it really necessary to have both ... looks to me that port in
private_data is overkill

>  
> +	ret = meson_uart_probe_clocks(port);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
>  	meson_ports[pdev->id] = port;
>  	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, port);
>  
> @@ -766,10 +839,39 @@ static int meson_uart_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  }
>  
>  static const struct of_device_id meson_uart_dt_match[] = {
> -	{ .compatible = "amlogic,meson6-uart" },
> -	{ .compatible = "amlogic,meson8-uart" },
> -	{ .compatible = "amlogic,meson8b-uart" },
> -	{ .compatible = "amlogic,meson-gx-uart" },
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson6-uart",
> +		.data = (void *)false,
> +	},
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson8-uart",
> +		.data = (void *)false,
> +	},
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson8b-uart",
> +		.data = (void *)false,
> +	},
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson-gxbb-uart",
> +		.data = (void *)false,
> +	},
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson-gxl-uart",
> +		.data = (void *)true,
> +	},
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson-g12a-uart",
> +		.data = (void *)true,
> +	},
> +	/*
> +	 * deprecated, don't use anymore because it doesn't differentiate
> +	 * between GXBB, GXL and G12A which have different revisions
> +	 * of the UART IP.
> +	 */
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "amlogic,meson-gx-uart",
> +		.data = (void *)false,
> +	},
>  	{ /* sentinel */ },
>  };
>  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, meson_uart_dt_match);


  reply	other threads:[~2022-01-10 14:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-01-10  8:55 [PATCH V4 0/5] the UART driver compatible with Yu Tu
2022-01-10  8:56 ` [PATCH V4 1/5] dt-bindings: serial: meson: Drop Yu Tu
2022-01-10  8:56 ` [PATCH V4 2/5] tty: serial: meson: Request the register Yu Tu
2022-01-10  8:56 ` [PATCH V4 3/5] tty: serial: meson: The UART baud rate Yu Tu
2022-01-10 14:29   ` Jerome Brunet [this message]
2022-01-11  7:04     ` Yu Tu
2022-01-17  8:26       ` Jerome Brunet
2022-01-17  9:03         ` Yu Tu
2022-01-12 16:08   ` kernel test robot
2022-01-12 20:05   ` kernel test robot
2022-01-10  8:56 ` [PATCH V4 4/5] tty: serial: meson: Make the bit24 and Yu Tu
2022-01-10  8:56 ` [PATCH V4 5/5] tty: serial: meson: Added S4 SOC compatibility Yu Tu
2022-01-10  9:27 ` [PATCH V4 0/5] the UART driver compatible with Neil Armstrong
2022-01-10  9:35   ` Yu Tu
2022-01-10  9:43     ` Neil Armstrong

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1j8rvnps11.fsf@starbuckisacylon.baylibre.com \
    --to=jbrunet@baylibre.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jirislaby@kernel.org \
    --cc=khilman@baylibre.com \
    --cc=linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-serial@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com \
    --cc=narmstrong@baylibre.com \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=yu.tu@amlogic.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome