| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20121019055943.GA4185@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 11:29:43 +0530
From: Shiraz Hashim <shiraz.hashim@...com>
To: viresh kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>,
<spear--sw-devel@...ts.codex.cro.st.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <spear-devel@...t.st.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pwm: add spear pwm driver support
Hi Viresh,
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:11:06PM +0530, viresh kumar wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Shiraz Hashim <shiraz.hashim@...com> wrote:
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/st-spear-pwm.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/st-spear-pwm.txt
> > +== ST SPEAr SoC PWM controller ==
> > +
> > +Required properties:
> > +- compatible: should be one of:
> > + - "st,spear-pwm"
> > + - "st,spear13xx-pwm"
>
> This has be matching with an version of the IP, as discussed earlier for many
> driver.
>
> Because ST hasn't released any specific version numbers, you must mention
> name of the SoC where the IP first appeared. That will mark its version. So,
> in short don't use generic names like spear or spear13xx :)
>
Okay. So I would rename compatible fields and accordingly as suggested
by Thierry, I would choose doc file name as 'spear-pwm.txt'.
> > +- reg: physical base address and length of the controller's registers
> > +- #pwm-cells: number of cells used to specify PWM which is fixed to 2 on SPEAr. The
> > + first cell specifies the per-chip index of the PWM to use and the second
> > + cell is the duty cycle in nanoseconds.
> > +
> > +Example:
> > +
> > + pwm: pwm@...00000 {
> > + compatible ="st,spear-pwm";
> > + reg = <0xa8000000 0x1000>;
> > + #pwm-cells = <2>;
> > + status = "disabled";
> > + };
>
> An example on how other nodes will link to it by passing id and duty cycle
> would be better.
>
I don't think it is required here, it is already covered in pwm.txt.
> > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> > index ed81720..3ff3e6f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> > @@ -112,6 +112,16 @@ config PWM_SAMSUNG
> > To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module
> > will be called pwm-samsung.
> >
> > +config PWM_SPEAR
> > + tristate "STMicroelectronics SPEAR PWM support"
>
> SPEAr
>
Yes, already pointed by Thierry.
> > + depends on PLAT_SPEAR
> > + help
> > + Generic PWM framework driver for the PWM controller on ST
> > + SPEAr SoCs.
> > +
> > + To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module
> > + will be called pwm-spear.
> > +
> > config PWM_TEGRA
> > tristate "NVIDIA Tegra PWM support"
> > depends on ARCH_TEGRA
> > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Makefile b/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> > index acfe482..6512786 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> > +++ b/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> > @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_PUV3) += pwm-puv3.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_PXA) += pwm-pxa.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_SAMSUNG) += pwm-samsung.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_TEGRA) += pwm-tegra.o
> > +obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_SPEAR) += pwm-spear.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_TIECAP) += pwm-tiecap.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_TIEHRPWM) += pwm-tiehrpwm.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_TWL6030) += pwm-twl6030.o
> > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-spear.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-spear.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..814395b
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-spear.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,287 @@
> > +/*
> > + * ST Microelectronics SPEAr Pulse Width Modulator driver
> > + *
> > + * Copyright (C) 2012 ST Microelectronics
> > + * Shiraz Hashim <shiraz.hashim@...com>
> > + *
> > + * This file is licensed under the terms of the GNU General Public
> > + * License version 2. This program is licensed "as is" without any
> > + * warranty of any kind, whether express or implied.
> > + */
> > +
> > +#include <linux/clk.h>
> > +#include <linux/err.h>
> > +#include <linux/io.h>
> > +#include <linux/ioport.h>
> > +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> > +#include <linux/math64.h>
> > +#include <linux/module.h>
> > +#include <linux/of.h>
> > +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> > +#include <linux/pwm.h>
> > +#include <linux/slab.h>
> > +
> > +/* PWM registers and bits definitions */
> > +#define PWMCR 0x00 /* Control Register */
> > +#define PWMDCR 0x04 /* Duty Cycle Register */
> > +#define PWMPCR 0x08 /* Period Register */
> > +/* Following only available on 13xx SoCs */
> > +#define PWMMCR 0x3C /* Master Control Register */
> > +
> > +#define PWM_ENABLE 0x1
> > +
> > +#define MIN_PRESCALE 0x00
> > +#define MAX_PRESCALE 0x3FFF
> > +#define PRESCALE_SHIFT 2
> > +
> > +#define MIN_DUTY 0x0001
> > +#define MAX_DUTY 0xFFFF
> > +
> > +#define MIN_PERIOD 0x0001
> > +#define MAX_PERIOD 0xFFFF
> > +
> > +#define NUM_PWM 4
> > +
> > +/**
> > + * struct pwm: struct representing pwm ip
>
> spear_pwm_chip: struct representing pwm chip
>
The whole kernel doc requires a fix, would do that.
> > + * mmio_base: base address of pwm
>
> base would be enough.
>
mmio_base isn't too bad.
> > + * clk: pointer to clk structure of pwm ip
> > + * chip: linux pwm chip representation
> > + * dev: pointer to device structure of pwm
> > + */
> > +struct spear_pwm_chip {
> > + void __iomem *mmio_base;
> > + struct clk *clk;
> > + struct pwm_chip chip;
> > + struct device *dev;
> > +};
> > +
> > +static inline struct spear_pwm_chip *to_spear_pwm_chip(struct pwm_chip *chip)
> > +{
> > + return container_of(chip, struct spear_pwm_chip, chip);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline u32 spear_pwm_readl(struct spear_pwm_chip *chip, unsigned int num,
>
> include types.h for u32
>
Okay.
> > + unsigned long offset)
> > +{
> > + return readl_relaxed(chip->mmio_base + (num << 4) + offset);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline void spear_pwm_writel(struct spear_pwm_chip *chip,
> > + unsigned int num, unsigned long offset, unsigned long val)
> > +{
> > + writel_relaxed(val, chip->mmio_base + (num << 4) + offset);
> > +}
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * period_ns = 10^9 * (PRESCALE + 1) * PV / PWM_CLK_RATE
> > + * duty_ns = 10^9 * (PRESCALE + 1) * DC / PWM_CLK_RATE
> > + *
> > + * PV = (PWM_CLK_RATE * period_ns)/ (10^9 * (PRESCALE + 1))
> > + * DC = (PWM_CLK_RATE * duty_ns)/ (10^9 * (PRESCALE + 1))
> > + */
> > +int spear_pwm_config(struct pwm_chip *pwm, struct pwm_device *pwmd, int duty_ns,
> > + int period_ns)
> > +{
> > + struct spear_pwm_chip *pc = to_spear_pwm_chip(pwm);
> > + u64 val, div, clk_rate;
> > + unsigned long prescale = MIN_PRESCALE, pv, dc;
> > + int ret = -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + if (period_ns == 0 || duty_ns > period_ns)
> > + goto err;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Find pv, dc and prescale to suit duty_ns and period_ns. This is done
> > + * according to formulas provided above this routine.
> > + */
> > + clk_rate = clk_get_rate(pc->clk);
> > + while (1) {
> > + div = 1000000000;
> > + div *= 1 + prescale;
> > + val = clk_rate * period_ns;
> > + pv = div64_u64(val, div);
> > + val = clk_rate * duty_ns;
> > + dc = div64_u64(val, div);
> > +
> > + /* if duty_ns and period_ns are not acheivable then return */
> > + if (!pv || !dc || pv < MIN_PERIOD || dc < MIN_DUTY)
> > + goto err;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * if pv and dc have crossed their upper limit, then increase
> > + * prescale and recalculate pv and dc.
> > + */
> > + if ((pv > MAX_PERIOD) || (dc > MAX_DUTY)) {
> > + prescale++;
> > + if (prescale > MAX_PRESCALE)
> > + goto err;
> > + continue;
> > + }
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * NOTE: the clock to PWM has to be enabled first before writing to the
> > + * registers.
> > + */
> > + ret = clk_prepare_enable(pc->clk);
> > + if (ret)
> > + goto err;
> > +
> > + spear_pwm_writel(pc, pwmd->hwpwm, PWMCR, prescale << PRESCALE_SHIFT);
> > + spear_pwm_writel(pc, pwmd->hwpwm, PWMDCR, dc);
> > + spear_pwm_writel(pc, pwmd->hwpwm, PWMPCR, pv);
> > + clk_disable_unprepare(pc->clk);
>
> Because for sure this driver is going to be used only for SPEAr, and so we
> wouldn't be doing anything at all in prepare and unprepare, I would suggest
> you to call prepare/unprepare one time only in probe/remove and use
> enable/disable here. This would make things fast here.
>
Okay.
> > + return 0;
> > +err:
> > + dev_err(pc->dev, "pwm config fail\n");
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int spear_pwm_enable(struct pwm_chip *pwm, struct pwm_device *pwmd)
> > +{
> > + struct spear_pwm_chip *pc = to_spear_pwm_chip(pwm);
> > + int rc = 0;
> > + u32 val;
> > +
> > + rc = clk_prepare_enable(pc->clk);
> > + if (rc < 0)
> > + return rc;
> > +
> > + val = spear_pwm_readl(pc, pwmd->hwpwm, PWMCR);
> > + val |= PWM_ENABLE;
> > + spear_pwm_writel(pc, pwmd->hwpwm, PWMCR, val);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void spear_pwm_disable(struct pwm_chip *pwm, struct pwm_device *pwmd)
> > +{
> > + struct spear_pwm_chip *pc = to_spear_pwm_chip(pwm);
> > + u32 val;
> > +
> > + val = spear_pwm_readl(pc, pwmd->hwpwm, PWMCR);
> > + val &= ~PWM_ENABLE;
> > + spear_pwm_writel(pc, pwmd->hwpwm, PWMCR, val);
> > +
> > + clk_disable_unprepare(pc->clk);
> > +}
>
> Would be better to create one function spear_pwm_endisable and just
> call it from these two.
>
Could be done. But I have started to realize that many a times
condensing such functions into one pose sufficient reading problems.
> > +static const struct pwm_ops spear_pwm_ops = {
> > + .config = spear_pwm_config,
> > + .enable = spear_pwm_enable,
> > + .disable = spear_pwm_disable,
> > + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int __devinit spear_pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > + struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node;
> > + struct spear_pwm_chip *pc;
> > + struct resource *r;
> > + int ret;
> > + u32 val;
> > +
> > + pc = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*pc), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!pc) {
> > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to allocate memory\n");
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > + }
> > +
> > + pc->dev = &pdev->dev;
> > +
> > + r = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> > + if (!r) {
> > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "no memory resources defined\n");
> > + return -ENODEV;
> > + }
>
> Move this before allocating memory.
>
Okay.
> > + pc->mmio_base = devm_request_and_ioremap(&pdev->dev, r);
> > + if (!pc->mmio_base)
> > + return -EADDRNOTAVAIL;
>
> Just check, i believe there is a routine which will do above two in a single
> call..
>
I would cross check.
> > + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, pc);
> > +
> > + pc->clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, NULL);
> > + if (IS_ERR(pc->clk))
> > + return PTR_ERR(pc->clk);
> > +
> > + pc->chip.dev = &pdev->dev;
> > + pc->chip.ops = &spear_pwm_ops;
> > + pc->chip.base = -1;
> > + pc->chip.npwm = NUM_PWM;
> > +
> > + ret = pwmchip_add(&pc->chip);
> > + if (ret < 0) {
> > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "pwmchip_add() failed: %d\n", ret);
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (np && of_device_is_compatible(np, "st,spear13xx-pwm")) {
> > + ret = clk_prepare_enable(pc->clk);
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + return pwmchip_remove(&pc->chip);
> > +
> > + /* Following enables PWM device, channels would still be
> > + * enabled individually through their control register
> > + **/
>
> check comment type
>
Would fix it.
> > + val = readl(pc->mmio_base + PWMMCR);
> > + val |= PWM_ENABLE;
> > + writel(val, pc->mmio_base + PWMMCR);
>
> _relaxed?
>
Okay. I can change that globally.
> > + clk_disable_unprepare(pc->clk);
>
> call only disable from here. Leave it prepared for ever.
>
and unprepare only in _remove. Okay.
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int __devexit spear_pwm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > + struct spear_pwm_chip *pc = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> > + int i;
> > +
> > + if (WARN_ON(!pc))
> > + return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i < NUM_PWM; i++) {
> > + struct pwm_device *pwmd = &pc->chip.pwms[i];
> > +
> > + if (!test_bit(PWMF_ENABLED, &pwmd->flags))
> > + if (clk_prepare_enable(pc->clk) < 0)
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + spear_pwm_writel(pc, i, PWMCR, 0);
> > + clk_disable_unprepare(pc->clk);
> > + }
>
> You are enabling/disabling clock N times here and each of these will
> write to an register. Do something better.
>
I need to shut down all active pwms, how else would you suggest that ?
> > + return pwmchip_remove(&pc->chip);
> > +}
> > +
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_OF
> > +static struct of_device_id spear_pwm_of_match[] = {
> > + { .compatible = "st,spear-pwm" },
> > + { .compatible = "st,spear13xx-pwm" },
> > + { }
> > +};
> > +
> > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, spear_pwm_of_match);
> > +#endif
> > +
> > +static struct platform_driver spear_pwm_driver = {
> > + .driver = {
> > + .name = "spear-pwm",
> > + .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(spear_pwm_of_match),
> > + },
> > + .probe = spear_pwm_probe,
> > + .remove = __devexit_p(spear_pwm_remove),
> > +};
> > +
> > +module_platform_driver(spear_pwm_driver);
> > +
> > +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> > +MODULE_AUTHOR("Shiraz Hashim <shiraz.hashim@...com>");
> > +MODULE_AUTHOR("Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.com>");
>
> Hey I am also an author, why am i reviewing it :)
> Glad to see this driver again. I have tried atleast thrice to get it
> included earlier,
> but wasn't successful :(
Now that we have a pwm framework in Linux, it shouldn't be that
difficult ;).
--
regards
Shiraz
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists