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
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1434622784.18278.39.camel@mtksdaap41>
Date:	Thu, 18 Jun 2015 18:19:44 +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>,
	<yingjoe.chen@...iatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] pwm: add MediaTek display PWM driver support

On Fri, 2015-06-12 at 12:20 +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 09:29:24PM +0800, YH Huang wrote:
> > Add display PWM driver support to modify backlight for MT8173.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: YH Huang <yh.huang@...iatek.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/pwm/Kconfig        |  10 ++
> >  drivers/pwm/Makefile       |   1 +
> >  drivers/pwm/pwm-mtk-disp.c | 228 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  3 files changed, 239 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 drivers/pwm/pwm-mtk-disp.c
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> > index b1541f4..90e3c079 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> > @@ -211,6 +211,16 @@ config PWM_LPSS_PLATFORM
> >  	  To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module
> >  	  will be called pwm-lpss-platform.
> >  
> > +config PWM_MTK_DISP
> > +	tristate "MediaTek display PWM driver"
> > +	depends on HAS_IOMEM
> > +	help
> > +	  Generic PWM framework driver for MediaTek disp-pwm device.
> > +	  The PWM is used to control the backlight brightness for display.
> > +
> > +	  To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module
> > +	  will be called pwm-mtk-disp.
> > +
> >  config PWM_MXS
> >  	tristate "Freescale MXS PWM support"
> >  	depends on ARCH_MXS && OF
> > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Makefile b/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> > index ec50eb5..99c9e75 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> > +++ b/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> > @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_LPC32XX)	+= pwm-lpc32xx.o
> >  obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_LPSS)		+= pwm-lpss.o
> >  obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_LPSS_PCI)	+= pwm-lpss-pci.o
> >  obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_LPSS_PLATFORM)	+= pwm-lpss-platform.o
> > +obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_MTK_DISP)	+= pwm-mtk-disp.o
> >  obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_MXS)		+= pwm-mxs.o
> >  obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_PCA9685)	+= pwm-pca9685.o
> >  obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_PUV3)		+= pwm-puv3.o
> > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-mtk-disp.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-mtk-disp.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..d4e4cb6
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-mtk-disp.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,228 @@
> > +/*
> > + * 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		0x0
> > +#define PWM_ENABLE_MASK		0x1
> > +
> > +#define DISP_PWM_COMMIT		0x08
> > +#define PWM_COMMIT_MASK		0x1
> > +
> > +#define DISP_PWM_CON_0		0x10
> > +#define PWM_CLKDIV_SHIFT	16
> > +#define PWM_CLKDIV_MASK		(0x3ff << PWM_CLKDIV_SHIFT)
> > +#define PWM_CLKDIV_MAX		0x000003ff
> 
> I think you should make this:
> 
> 	#define PWM_CLKDIV_MAX 0x3ff
> 	#define PWM_CLKDIV_MASK (PWM_CLKDIV_MAX << PWM_CLKDIV_SHIFT)
> 
> Just to show that these belong together.
> 

It is much clear.

> > +
> > +#define DISP_PWM_CON_1		0x14
> > +#define PWM_PERIOD_MASK		0xfff
> > +#define PWM_PERIOD_MAX		0x00000fff
> 
> Same here. PWM_PERIOD_MAX isn't actually used anywhere, so perhaps just
> drop it altogether. But see also below...
> 
> > +/* Shift log2(PWM_PERIOD_MAX + 1) as divisor */
> > +#define PWM_PERIOD_BIT_SHIFT	12
> 
> I wasn't very clear about this in my earlier review, so let me try to
> explain why I think this is confusing. You use this as a divisor, but
> you encode it as a shift. It's also PWM_PERIOD_MAX + 1, so I think it
> would make more sense to drop this, keep PWM_PERIOD_MAX as above and
> then replace the
> 
> 	>> PWM_PERIOD_BIT_SHIFT
> 	
> below by
> 
> 	/ (PWM_PERIOD_MAX + 1)
> 

Maybe I can change in this way:
Remove this: #define PWM_PERIOD_MAX		0x00000fff
Using ">> PWM_PERIOD_BIT_SHIFT" is faster than "/ (PWM_PERIOD_MAX + 1)"
Is this right?

> > +#define PWM_HIGH_WIDTH_SHIFT	16
> > +#define PWM_HIGH_WIDTH_MASK	(0x1fff << PWM_HIGH_WIDTH_SHIFT)
> 
> Why is the mask wider than for the period? That would imply that the
> duty cycle can be longer than a period, which doesn't make any sense.
> Can you clarify?
> 

After discussing with the hardware designer, the duty cycle is
calculated by "high_width / (period + 1)". If period is the "magic
number 0xfff", high_width needs 13 bits to show the situation that duty
cycle is 100%. I should fix the formula for high_width below.


> > +struct mtk_disp_pwm {
> > +	struct pwm_chip chip;
> > +	struct device *dev;
> > +	struct clk *clk_main;
> > +	struct clk *clk_mm;
> > +	void __iomem *mmio_base;
> 
> I think "base" will do just fine.
> 

OK.

> > +};
> > +
> > +static inline struct mtk_disp_pwm *to_mtk_disp_pwm(struct pwm_chip *chip)
> > +{
> > +	return container_of(chip, struct mtk_disp_pwm, chip);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void mtk_disp_pwm_update_bits(void __iomem *address, u32 mask, u32 value)
> > +{
> > +	u32 val;
> > +
> > +	val = readl(address);
> > +	val &= ~mask;
> > +	val |= value;
> > +	writel(val, address);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int mtk_disp_pwm_config(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
> > +			       int duty_ns, int period_ns)
> > +{
> > +	struct mtk_disp_pwm *mdp;
> > +	u64 div, rate;
> > +	u32 clk_div, period, high_width, value;
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * 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
> 
> Nit: should have a space between '+' and '1'.
> 

OK.

> > +	 * duty_ns = 10^9 * (clk_div + 1) * (high_width + 1) / PWM_CLK_RATE

Here should be
duty_ns = 10^9 * (clk_div + 1) * high_width / 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

And here
high_width = (PWM_CLK_RATE * duty_ns) / (10^9 * (clk_div + 1))

> > +	 */
> > +	mdp = to_mtk_disp_pwm(chip);
> 
> Please put this on the same line as the variable declaration:
> 
> 	struct mtk_disp_pwm *mdp = to_mtk_disp_pwm(chip);
> 

OK.

> > +	rate = clk_get_rate(mdp->clk_main);
> > +	clk_div = div_u64(rate * period_ns, NSEC_PER_SEC) >>
> > +			  PWM_PERIOD_BIT_SHIFT;
> > +	if (clk_div > PWM_CLKDIV_MAX)
> > +		return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > +	div = clk_div + 1;
> 
> Perhaps make this:
> 
> 	div = NSEC_PER_SEC * (clk_div + 1);
> 
> to avoid the two multiplication below.
> 

You are right.

> > +	period = div64_u64(rate * period_ns, NSEC_PER_SEC * div);
> 
> So this would become:
> 
> 	period = div64_u64(rate * period_ns, div);
> 

Got it.

> > +	if (period > 0)
> > +		period--;
> > +
> > +	high_width = div64_u64(rate * duty_ns, NSEC_PER_SEC * div);
> 
> And this:
> 
> 	high_width = div64_u64(rate * duty_ns, div);
> 

OK.

> > +	if (high_width > 0)
> > +		high_width--;

I should remove this two lines above for the new formula.

> > +
> > +	mtk_disp_pwm_update_bits(mdp->mmio_base + DISP_PWM_CON_0,
> > +				 PWM_CLKDIV_MASK, clk_div << PWM_CLKDIV_SHIFT);
> > +
> > +	value = period | (high_width << PWM_HIGH_WIDTH_SHIFT);
> > +	mtk_disp_pwm_update_bits(mdp->mmio_base + DISP_PWM_CON_1,
> > +				 PWM_PERIOD_MASK | PWM_HIGH_WIDTH_MASK, value);
> > +
> > +	mtk_disp_pwm_update_bits(mdp->mmio_base + DISP_PWM_COMMIT,
> > +				 PWM_COMMIT_MASK, 1);
> > +	mtk_disp_pwm_update_bits(mdp->mmio_base + DISP_PWM_COMMIT,
> > +				 PWM_COMMIT_MASK, 0);
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int mtk_disp_pwm_enable(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm)
> > +{
> > +	struct mtk_disp_pwm *mdp;
> > +
> > +	mdp = to_mtk_disp_pwm(chip);
> 
> The above three lines should be collapsed.
> 

OK.

> > +	mtk_disp_pwm_update_bits(mdp->mmio_base + DISP_PWM_EN,
> > +				 PWM_ENABLE_MASK, 1);
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void mtk_disp_pwm_disable(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm)
> > +{
> > +	struct mtk_disp_pwm *mdp;
> > +
> > +	mdp = to_mtk_disp_pwm(chip);
> 
> Same here.
> 

OK.

> > +	mtk_disp_pwm_update_bits(mdp->mmio_base + DISP_PWM_EN,
> > +				 PWM_ENABLE_MASK, 0);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static const struct pwm_ops mtk_disp_pwm_ops = {
> > +	.config = mtk_disp_pwm_config,
> > +	.enable = mtk_disp_pwm_enable,
> > +	.disable = mtk_disp_pwm_disable,
> > +	.owner = THIS_MODULE,
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int mtk_disp_pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > +	struct mtk_disp_pwm *mdp;
> > +	struct resource *r;
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	mdp = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*mdp), GFP_KERNEL);
> > +	if (!mdp)
> > +		return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > +	mdp->dev = &pdev->dev;
> > +
> > +	r = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> > +	mdp->mmio_base = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, r);
> > +	if (IS_ERR(mdp->mmio_base))
> > +		return PTR_ERR(mdp->mmio_base);
> > +
> > +	mdp->clk_main = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "main");
> > +	if (IS_ERR(mdp->clk_main))
> > +		return PTR_ERR(mdp->clk_main);
> > +
> > +	mdp->clk_mm = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "mm");
> > +	if (IS_ERR(mdp->clk_mm))
> > +		return PTR_ERR(mdp->clk_mm);
> > +
> > +	ret = clk_prepare_enable(mdp->clk_main);
> > +	if (ret < 0)
> > +		return ret;
> > +
> > +	ret = clk_prepare_enable(mdp->clk_mm);
> > +	if (ret < 0) {
> > +		clk_disable_unprepare(mdp->clk_main);
> > +		return ret;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, mdp);
> > +
> > +	mdp->chip.dev = &pdev->dev;
> > +	mdp->chip.ops = &mtk_disp_pwm_ops;
> > +	mdp->chip.base = -1;
> > +	mdp->chip.npwm = 1;
> > +
> > +	ret = pwmchip_add(&mdp->chip);
> > +	if (ret < 0) {
> > +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "pwmchip_add() failed: %d\n", ret);
> > +		clk_disable_unprepare(mdp->clk_main);
> > +		clk_disable_unprepare(mdp->clk_mm);
> > +		return ret;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> 
> It's customary to collect the error cleanup code in an unwinding section
> at the bottom of the function, like so:
> 
> 	ret = clk_prepare_enable(mdp->clk_mm);
> 	if (ret < 0)
> 		goto disable_clk_main;
> 
> 	...
> 
> 	ret = pwmchip_add(&mdp->chip);
> 	if (ret < 0) {
> 		dev_err(&pdev->dev, ...);
> 		goto disable_clk_mm;
> 	}
> 
> 	return 0;
> 
> disable_clk_mm:
> 	clk_disable_unprepare(mdp->clk_mm);
> disable_clk_main:
> 	clk_disable_unprepare(mdp->clk_main);
> 	return ret;
> 
> This makes sure that you undo things in the proper order and eliminates
> the need to duplicate cleanup code in all failure paths.
> 

I will rewrite this part.

> > +
> > +static int mtk_disp_pwm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > +	struct mtk_disp_pwm *mdp;
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	mdp = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> 
> Should be on the same line as the variable declaration.
> 

OK.

> > +	ret = pwmchip_remove(&mdp->chip);
> > +	clk_disable_unprepare(mdp->clk_main);
> > +	clk_disable_unprepare(mdp->clk_mm);
> > +
> > +	return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static const struct of_device_id mtk_disp_pwm_of_match[] = {
> > +	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt8173-disp-pwm" },
> > +	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt6595-disp-pwm" },
> > +	{ }
> > +};
> > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, mtk_disp_pwm_of_match);
> > +
> > +static struct platform_driver mtk_disp_pwm_driver = {
> > +	.driver = {
> > +		.name = "mediatek-disp-pwm",
> > +		.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);
> > +
> > +MODULE_AUTHOR("YH Huang <yh.huang@...iatek.com>");
> > +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("MediaTek SoC display PWM driver");
> > +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> 
> 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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ