Thread (12 messages) 12 messages, 3 authors, 2019-10-02

Re: [PATCH 1/4] pwm: mxs: implement ->apply

From: Uwe Kleine-König <hidden>
Date: 2019-09-23 08:25:05
Also in: linux-devicetree, linux-pwm, lkml

Hello Rasmus,

On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 10:13:45AM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
In preparation for supporting setting the polarity, switch the driver
to support the ->apply method.

Signed-off-by: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
---
 drivers/pwm/pwm-mxs.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 62 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-mxs.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-mxs.c
index 04c0f6b95c1a..c70c26a9ff68 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-mxs.c
+++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-mxs.c
@@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
 #define  PERIOD_PERIOD_MAX	0x10000
 #define  PERIOD_ACTIVE_HIGH	(3 << 16)
 #define  PERIOD_INACTIVE_LOW	(2 << 18)
+#define  PERIOD_POLARITY_NORMAL	(PERIOD_ACTIVE_HIGH | PERIOD_INACTIVE_LOW)
 #define  PERIOD_CDIV(div)	(((div) & 0x7) << 20)
 #define  PERIOD_CDIV_MAX	8
 
@@ -41,6 +42,66 @@ struct mxs_pwm_chip {
 
 #define to_mxs_pwm_chip(_chip) container_of(_chip, struct mxs_pwm_chip, chip)
 
+static int mxs_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
+			 struct pwm_state *state)
+{
+	struct mxs_pwm_chip *mxs = to_mxs_pwm_chip(chip);
+	int ret, div = 0;
+	unsigned int period_cycles, duty_cycles;
+	unsigned long rate;
+	unsigned long long c;
+
+	if (state->polarity != PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL)
+		return -ENOTSUPP;
+
+	rate = clk_get_rate(mxs->clk);
+	while (1) {
+		c = rate / cdiv[div];
+		c = c * state->period;
+		do_div(c, 1000000000);
+		if (c < PERIOD_PERIOD_MAX)
+			break;
+		div++;
+		if (div >= PERIOD_CDIV_MAX)
+			return -EINVAL;
+	}
+
+	period_cycles = c;
+	c *= state->duty_cycle;
+	do_div(c, state->period);
+	duty_cycles = c;
+
+	/*
+	 * If the PWM channel is disabled, make sure to turn on the clock
+	 * before writing the register. Otherwise, keep it enabled.
+	 */
+	if (!pwm_is_enabled(pwm)) {
+		ret = clk_prepare_enable(mxs->clk);
+		if (ret)
+			return ret;
+	}
+
+	writel(duty_cycles << 16,
+	       mxs->base + PWM_ACTIVE0 + pwm->hwpwm * 0x20);
+	writel(PERIOD_PERIOD(period_cycles) | PERIOD_POLARITY_NORMAL | PERIOD_CDIV(div),
+	       mxs->base + PWM_PERIOD0 + pwm->hwpwm * 0x20);
+
+	if (state->enabled) {
+		if (!pwm_is_enabled(pwm)) {
+			/*
+			 * The clock was enabled above. Just enable
+			 * the channel in the control register.
+			 */
+			writel(1 << pwm->hwpwm, mxs->base + PWM_CTRL + SET);
+		}
+	} else {
+		if (pwm_is_enabled(pwm))
+			writel(1 << pwm->hwpwm, mxs->base + PWM_CTRL + CLR);
+		clk_disable_unprepare(mxs->clk);
+	}
+	return 0;
+}
Maybe it would be easier to review when converting from .config +
.enable + .disable to .apply in a single step. (Note this "maybe" is
honest, I'm not entirely sure.)

There is a bug: If the PWM is running at (say) period=100ms, duty=0ms
and we call
pwm_apply_state(pwm, { .enabled = false, duty=100000, period=1000000 });
the output might get high which it should not.

Also there is a bug already in .config: You are not supposed to call
clk_get_rate if the clk might be off.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help