Hi Hugo, Thank you for your review.
On Fri, Nov 7, 2025 11:31 AM, Hugo Villeneuve wrote: > > + if (params->pl5_intin < PLL5_INTIN_MIN || > > + params->pl5_intin > PLL5_INTIN_MAX) > > Your patch comments indicate that you removed +1 and -1 for kernel test robot > issue, but I do not understand why. > > pl5_intin is still defined as u8 (max 255), and therefore the result of > "params->pl5_intin > PLL5_INTIN_MAX" will always be false because > PLL5_INTIN_MAX is 320. > > It seems to me that pl5_intin type should be modified to account for its > maximum value (u16?), and this should probably goes into a separate patch > (with a Fixed: tag), that can be backported (if necessary). You are totally right! INTIN is a 12-bit register value. It's a bug. Good catch. I'll make that a separate patch so I can CC stable. Chris
