On 15/11/2019 05.50, Timur Tabi wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 7:04 AM Rasmus Villemoes
> <li...@rasmusvillemoes.dk> wrote:
>>
>> +static bool qe_general4_errata(void)
>> +{
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC32
>> + return pvr_version_is(PVR_VER_836x) || pvr_version_is(PVR_VER_832x);
>> +#endif
>> + return false;
>> +}
>> +
>> /* Program the BRG to the given sampling rate and multiplier
>> *
>> * @brg: the BRG, QE_BRG1 - QE_BRG16
>> @@ -223,7 +231,7 @@ int qe_setbrg(enum qe_clock brg, unsigned int rate,
>> unsigned int multiplier)
>> /* Errata QE_General4, which affects some MPC832x and MPC836x SOCs,
>> says
>> that the BRG divisor must be even if you're not using divide-by-16
>> mode. */
>
> Can you also move this comment (and fix the comment formatting so that
> it's a proper function comment) to qe_general4_errata()?
>
I actually thought of doing that, but decided against it because the
comment not only mentions the SOCs affected, but also explains the
following math/logic. I mean, without that comment nearby, the code is
if (qe_general4_errata())
if (some weird condition)
divisor++;
In contrast, I think the qe_general4_errata() is pretty self-explanatory
- is this a SOC affected by that errata (whatever that errata may be
about and what the software workaround is).
Rasmus
