| 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: <1431617729.15140.54.camel@mtksdaap41>
Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 23:35:29 +0800
From: YH Huang <yh.huang@...iatek.com>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
CC: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>, <linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<srv_heupstream@...iatek.com>,
<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>, <yh.huang@...iatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] pwm: add Mediatek display PWM driver support
On Tue, 2015-05-12 at 15:32 +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 05:26:22PM +0800, YH Huang wrote:
> > Add display PWM driver support to modify backlight for MT8173/MT6595.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: YH Huang <yh.huang@...iatek.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/pwm/Kconfig | 9 ++
> > drivers/pwm/Makefile | 1 +
> > drivers/pwm/pwm-disp-mediatek.c | 225 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 3 files changed, 235 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 drivers/pwm/pwm-disp-mediatek.c
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> > index b1541f4..9edbb5a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> > @@ -111,6 +111,15 @@ config PWM_CLPS711X
> > To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module
> > will be called pwm-clps711x.
> >
> > +config PWM_DISP_MEDIATEK
>
> Please make this "PWM_MEDIATEK_DISP" so we can keep everything sorted by
> vendor.
>
Probably "PWM_MTK_DSIP" for Matthias opinion?
> > + tristate "MEDIATEK display PWM driver"
>
> "MediaTek"?
>
OK.
> > + depends on OF
>
> Technically I think you need depends on HAS_IOMEM here to avoid breakage
> on randconfig builds.
>
OK.
> > + help
> > + Generic PWM framework driver for mediatek disp-pwm device.
>
> "MediaTek"? Also perhaps this should describe what this PWM is instead
> of just the "disp-pwm" which leaves everyone guessing what it is. From
> the name I'd expect it to be the PWM that is used to control the
> backlight brightness for display, but I think this description should
> say that explicitly.
>
> > +
> > + To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module
> > + will be called pwm-disp-mediatek.
>
> pwm-mediatek-disp
pwm-mtk-disp?
>
> > +
> > config PWM_EP93XX
> > tristate "Cirrus Logic EP93xx PWM support"
> > depends on ARCH_EP93XX
> > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Makefile b/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> > index ec50eb5..c5ff72a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> > +++ b/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> > @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_BCM_KONA) += pwm-bcm-kona.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_BCM2835) += pwm-bcm2835.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_BFIN) += pwm-bfin.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_CLPS711X) += pwm-clps711x.o
> > +obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_DISP_MEDIATEK) += pwm-disp-mediatek.o
>
> Also name this "pwm-mediatek-disp.o" to reflect the Kconfig name.
pwm-mtk-disp.o?
>
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_EP93XX) += pwm-ep93xx.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_FSL_FTM) += pwm-fsl-ftm.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_IMG) += pwm-img.o
> > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-disp-mediatek.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-disp-mediatek.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..38293af
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-disp-mediatek.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,225 @@
> > +/*
> > + * Mediatek display pulse-width-modulation controller driver.
> > + * Copyright (c) 2015 MediaTek Inc.
> > + * Author: YH Huang <yh.huang@...iatek.com>
> > + *
> > + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> > + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
> > + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> > + *
> > + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> > + * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> > + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
> > + * GNU General Public License for more details.
> > + */
> > +
> > +#include <linux/clk.h>
> > +#include <linux/err.h>
> > +#include <linux/io.h>
> > +#include <linux/module.h>
> > +#include <linux/of.h>
> > +#include <linux/pwm.h>
> > +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> > +#include <linux/slab.h>
> > +
> > +#define DISP_PWM_EN_OFF (0x0)
>
> The _OFF suffix here is unfortunate because I'm reading this as being
> the "OFF" value for a field named "DISP_PWM_EN". I think it'd be better
> to name this one DISP_PWM_EN. The same goes for any of the following
> registers.
>
> Also, drop the parentheses if the expression is simple.
OK. It is really confusing.
>
> > +#define PWM_ENABLE_SHIFT (0x0)
> > +#define PWM_ENABLE_MASK (0x1 << PWM_ENABLE_SHIFT)
> > +
> > +#define DISP_PWM_COMMIT_OFF (0x08)
> > +#define PWM_COMMIT_SHIFT (0x0)
> > +#define PWM_COMMIT_MASK (0x1 << PWM_COMMIT_SHIFT)
> > +
> > +#define DISP_PWM_CON_0_OFF (0x10)
> > +#define PWM_CLKDIV_SHIFT (0x10)
> > +#define PWM_CLKDIV_MASK (0x3ff << PWM_CLKDIV_SHIFT)
> > +#define PWM_CLKDIV_MAX (0x000003ff)
> > +
> > +#define DISP_PWM_CON_1_OFF (0x14)
> > +#define PWM_PERIOD_SHIFT (0x0)
> > +#define PWM_PERIOD_MASK (0xfff << PWM_PERIOD_SHIFT)
> > +#define PWM_PERIOD_MAX (0x00000fff)
> > +/* Shift log2(PWM_PERIOD_MAX + 1) as divisor */
> > +#define PWM_PERIOD_BIT_SHIFT 12
>
> This is confusing, see below.
I don't really understand what does this mean.
Please help me.
>
> > +
> > +#define PWM_HIGH_WIDTH_SHIFT (0x10)
> > +#define PWM_HIGH_WIDTH_MASK (0x1fff << PWM_HIGH_WIDTH_SHIFT)
> > +
> > +#define NUM_PWM 1
>
> You can drop this, it's only used once.
>
OK.
> > +
> > +struct mtk_disp_pwm_chip {
> > + struct pwm_chip chip;
> > + struct device *dev;
> > + struct clk *clk_main;
> > + struct clk *clk_mm;
> > + void __iomem *mmio_base;
> > +};
>
> Please don't add this artificial padding, a single space is enough as a
> separator. Also, I think you can drop the _chip suffix on the structure
> name.
>
OK.
> > +
> > +static void mtk_disp_pwm_setting(void __iomem *address, u32 value, u32 mask)
>
> This is a bad name. I think you should adopt the naming of regmap, which
> this effectively copies, so this should be:
>
> static void mtk_disp_pwm_update_bits(void __iomem *address, u32 mask, u32 value)
>
It is much readable.
> > +static int mtk_disp_pwm_config(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
> > + int duty_ns, int period_ns)
> > +{
> > + struct mtk_disp_pwm_chip *mpc;
> > + u64 div, rate;
> > + u32 clk_div, period, high_width, rem;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Find period, high_width and clk_div to suit duty_ns and period_ns.
> > + * Calculate proper div value to keep period value in the bound.
> > + *
> > + * period_ns = 10^9 * (clk_div + 1) * (period +1) / PWM_CLK_RATE
> > + * duty_ns = 10^9 * (clk_div + 1) * (high_width + 1) / PWM_CLK_RATE
> > + *
> > + * period = (PWM_CLK_RATE * period_ns) / (10^9 * (clk_div + 1)) - 1
> > + * high_width = (PWM_CLK_RATE * duty_ns) / (10^9 * (clk_div + 1)) - 1
> > + */
> > + mpc = container_of(chip, struct mtk_disp_pwm_chip, chip);
>
> Can you add a static inline function to wrap the container_of()
> invocation? You need to do this quite often and the wrapper will shorten
> the code significantly:
>
> static inline struct mtk_disp_pwm *to_mtk_disp_pwm(struct pwm_chip *chip)
> {
> return container_of(chip, struct mtk_disp_pwm, chip);
> }
>
> Also it's slightly more canonical to initialize the mpc variable as part
> of the declaration.
>
This is a good way to shorten the code.
> > + rate = clk_get_rate(mpc->clk_main);
> > + clk_div = div_u64_rem(rate * period_ns, NSEC_PER_SEC, &rem) >>
> > + PWM_PERIOD_BIT_SHIFT;
> > + if (clk_div > PWM_CLKDIV_MAX)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + div = clk_div + 1;
> > + period = div64_u64(rate * period_ns, NSEC_PER_SEC * div);
> > + if (period > 0)
> > + period--;
> > + high_width = div64_u64(rate * duty_ns, NSEC_PER_SEC * div);
> > + if (high_width > 0)
> > + high_width--;
> > +
> > + mtk_disp_pwm_setting(mpc->mmio_base + DISP_PWM_CON_0_OFF,
> > + clk_div << PWM_CLKDIV_SHIFT, PWM_CLKDIV_MASK);
> > + mtk_disp_pwm_setting(mpc->mmio_base + DISP_PWM_CON_1_OFF,
> > + (period << PWM_PERIOD_SHIFT) |
> > + (high_width << PWM_HIGH_WIDTH_SHIFT),
> > + PWM_PERIOD_MASK | PWM_HIGH_WIDTH_MASK);
>
> Can you align these differently to make it more readable?
>
> mtk_display_pwm_update_bits(mpc->mmio_base + DISP_PWM_CON_1,
> PWM_PERIOD_MASK | PWM_HIGH_WIDTH_MASK,
> (period << PWM_PERIOD_SHIFT) |
> (high_width << PWM_HIGH_WIDTH_SHIFT));
>
> Or perhaps split it into multiple steps to make it even more readable:
>
> value = (high_width << PWM_HIGH_WIDTH_SHIFT) |
> (period << PWM_PERIOD_SHIFT);
> mtk_display_pwm_update_bits(mpc->mmio_base + DISP_PWM_CON_1,
> PWM_HIGH_WIDTH_MASK | PWM_PERIOD_MASK,
> value);
>
OK, it is really hard to read.
> > +static int mtk_disp_pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > + struct mtk_disp_pwm_chip *pwm;
> > + struct resource *r;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + pwm = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*pwm), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!pwm)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > + pwm->dev = &pdev->dev;
> > +
> > + r = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> > + pwm->mmio_base = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, r);
> > + if (IS_ERR(pwm->mmio_base))
> > + return PTR_ERR(pwm->mmio_base);
> > +
> > + pwm->clk_main = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "main");
> > + if (IS_ERR(pwm->clk_main))
> > + return PTR_ERR(pwm->clk_main);
> > + pwm->clk_mm = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "mm");
>
> I think it's more readable if a blank line separates the above two
> lines.
OK.
>
> > + if (IS_ERR(pwm->clk_mm))
> > + return PTR_ERR(pwm->clk_mm);
> > +
> > + ret = clk_prepare_enable(pwm->clk_main);
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + return ret;
> > + ret = clk_prepare_enable(pwm->clk_mm);
>
> Same here.
OK.
>
> > + if (ret < 0) {
> > + clk_disable_unprepare(pwm->clk_main);
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, pwm);
> > +
> > + pwm->chip.dev = &pdev->dev;
> > + pwm->chip.ops = &mtk_disp_pwm_ops;
> > + pwm->chip.base = -1;
> > + pwm->chip.npwm = NUM_PWM;
> > +
> > + ret = pwmchip_add(&pwm->chip);
> > + if (ret < 0) {
> > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "pwmchip_add() failed: %d\n", ret);
>
> Shouldn't you disable the clocks here?
I will fix it.
>
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int mtk_disp_pwm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > + struct mtk_disp_pwm_chip *pc = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> > +
> > + if (WARN_ON(!pc))
> > + return -ENODEV;
>
> You can drop this. Better to let it crash so that you have to fix it if
> you ever encounter it.
I will think about it.
>
> > +
> > + clk_disable_unprepare(pc->clk_main);
> > + clk_disable_unprepare(pc->clk_mm);
> > +
> > + return pwmchip_remove(&pc->chip);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static const struct of_device_id mtk_disp_pwm_of_match[] = {
> > + { .compatible = "mediatek,mt6595-disp-pwm" },
> > + { }
> > +};
> > +
> > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, mtk_disp_pwm_of_match);
>
> No blank line between the above two lines.
OK.
>
> > +
> > +static struct platform_driver mtk_disp_pwm_driver = {
> > + .driver = {
> > + .name = "mediatek-disp-pwm",
> > + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> > + .of_match_table = mtk_disp_pwm_of_match,
> > + },
> > + .probe = mtk_disp_pwm_probe,
> > + .remove = mtk_disp_pwm_remove,
> > +};
> > +
> > +module_platform_driver(mtk_disp_pwm_driver);
>
> Same here. Also, no need to initialize .driver.owner,
> module_platform_driver() does that for you.
Got it.
>
> Thierry
Thank for your suggestion.
Regards,
YH Huang
--
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