blob: f4804cd52a5b089c3c5795061344903c68527a01 [file] [log] [blame]
From c7ae622c07b16f401492889887eea26595ab2ca4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Claudiu Beznea <>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2020 13:36:46 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] clk: at91: usb: continue if clk_hw_round_rate() return zero
commit b0ecf1c6c6e82da4847900fad0272abfd014666d upstream.
clk_hw_round_rate() may call round rate function of its parents. In case
of SAM9X60 two of USB parrents are PLLA and UPLL. These clocks are
controlled by clk-sam9x60-pll.c driver. The round rate function for this
driver is sam9x60_pll_round_rate() which call in turn
sam9x60_pll_get_best_div_mul(). In case the requested rate is not in the
proper range (rate < characteristics->output[0].min &&
rate > characteristics->output[0].max) the sam9x60_pll_round_rate() will
return a negative number to its caller (called by
clk_core_round_rate_nolock()). clk_hw_round_rate() will return zero in
case a negative number is returned by clk_core_round_rate_nolock(). With
this, the USB clock will continue its rate computation even caller of
clk_hw_round_rate() returned an error. With this, the USB clock on SAM9X60
may not chose the best parent. I detected this after a suspend/resume
cycle on SAM9X60.
Signed-off-by: Claudiu Beznea <>
Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <>
Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker <>
diff --git a/drivers/clk/at91/clk-usb.c b/drivers/clk/at91/clk-usb.c
index bda92980e015..c0895c993cce 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/at91/clk-usb.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/at91/clk-usb.c
@@ -75,6 +75,9 @@ static int at91sam9x5_clk_usb_determine_rate(struct clk_hw *hw,
tmp_parent_rate = req->rate * div;
tmp_parent_rate = clk_hw_round_rate(parent,
+ if (!tmp_parent_rate)
+ continue;
tmp_rate = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(tmp_parent_rate, div);
if (tmp_rate < req->rate)
tmp_diff = req->rate - tmp_rate;