Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] Add PWM fan controller driver for LGM SoC
From: Andy Shevchenko <hidden>
Date: 2020-08-20 10:53:25
Also in:
linux-pwm, lkml
On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 12:50:46PM +0800, Rahul Tanwar wrote:
Intel Lightning Mountain(LGM) SoC contains a PWM fan controller. This PWM controller does not have any other consumer, it is a dedicated PWM controller for fan attached to the system. Add driver for this PWM fan controller.
...
+config PWM_INTEL_LGM + tristate "Intel LGM PWM support"
+ depends on OF && HAS_IOMEM + depends on X86 || COMPILE_TEST
For better test coverage you may rewrite this depends on HAS_IOMEM depends on (OF && X86) || COMPILE_TEST
+ select REGMAP_MMIO + help + Generic PWM fan controller driver for LGM SoC. + + To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module + will be called pwm-intel-lgm.
...
+#include <linux/bitfield.h> +#include <linux/clk.h> +#include <linux/module.h>
+#include <linux/of_device.h>
This should be mod_devicetable.h.
+#include <linux/pwm.h> +#include <linux/regmap.h> +#include <linux/reset.h>
...
+#define LGM_PWM_PERIOD_2WIRE_NSECS 40000000
NSECS -> NS 40000000 -> (40 * NSEC_PER_MSEC) ...
+ if (state->polarity != PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL || + state->period < pc->period)
It can be one line.
+ return -EINVAL;
...
+ if (!state->enabled) {+ ret = lgm_pwm_enable(chip, 0); + return ret;
What is the point?
+ }
...
+ ret = lgm_pwm_enable(chip, 1); + + return ret;
Ditto. ...
+ state->duty_cycle = DIV_ROUND_UP(duty * pc->period, + LGM_PWM_MAX_DUTY_CYCLE);
One line? ...
+ struct lgm_pwm_chip *pc; + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
Use reversed xmas tree order.
+ void __iomem *io_base; + int ret;
...
+ pc->regmap = devm_regmap_init_mmio(dev, io_base, &lgm_pwm_regmap_config);
+ if (IS_ERR(pc->regmap)) {+ ret = PTR_ERR(pc->regmap); + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER) + dev_err(dev, "failed to init register map: %pe\n", + pc->regmap); + return ret;
dev_err_probe()
+ }
...
+ pc->clk = devm_clk_get(dev, NULL);
+ if (IS_ERR(pc->clk)) {
+ ret = PTR_ERR(pc->clk);
+ if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
+ dev_err(dev, "failed to get clock: %pe\n", pc->clk);
+ return ret;Ditto.
+ }
+
+ pc->rst = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive(dev, NULL);
+ if (IS_ERR(pc->rst)) {
+ ret = PTR_ERR(pc->rst);
+ if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
+ dev_err(dev, "failed to get reset control: %pe\n",
+ pc->rst);
+ return ret;Ditto.
+ }
+
+ ret = reset_control_deassert(pc->rst);
+ if (ret) {
+ if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
+ dev_err(dev, "cannot deassert reset control: %pe\n",
+ ERR_PTR(ret));
+ return ret;Ditto.
+ }
...
+ ret = clk_prepare_enable(pc->clk);
Wrap it with devm_add_action_or_reset(). Same for reset_control_deassert(). You probably can even put them under one function.
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(dev, "failed to enable clock\n");
+ reset_control_assert(pc->rst);
+ return ret;
+ }...
+ ret = pwmchip_add(&pc->chip);
+ if (ret < 0) {Does ' < 0' have any meaning?
+ dev_err(dev, "failed to add PWM chip: %pe\n", ERR_PTR(ret)); + clk_disable_unprepare(pc->clk); + reset_control_assert(pc->rst); + return ret; + }
...
+ ret = pwmchip_remove(&pc->chip); + if (ret < 0)
Ditto.
+ return ret;
-- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko