| 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: <CAMHSBOWLqDEH2-V503szG3GXHPGBAXpzjU2J7Kdp__wXhUQOGA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 May 2016 22:02:33 -0700
From: Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@...omium.org>
To: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
Cc: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
Stephen Barber <smbarber@...omium.org>,
Sameer Nanda <snanda@...omium.org>,
Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>,
Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>,
Enric Balletbo <enric.balletbo@...labora.co.uk>,
Randall Spangler <rspangler@...omium.org>,
Shawn Nematbakhsh <shawnn@...omium.org>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Todd Broch <tbroch@...omium.org>,
Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@...omium.org>,
Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] pwm: add ChromeOS EC PWM driver
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 6:39 PM, Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org> wrote:
> Use the new ChromeOS EC EC_CMD_PWM_{GET,SET}_DUTY commands to control
> one or more PWMs attached to the Embedded Controller. Because the EC
> allows us to modify the duty cycle (as a percentage, where U16_MAX is
> 100%) but not the period, we assign the period a fixed value of
> EC_PWM_MAX_DUTY and reject all attempts to change it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
> ---
> + */
> +struct cros_ec_pwm_device {
> + struct device *dev;
> + struct cros_ec_device *ec;
> + struct pwm_chip chip;
> +};
> +
> +static inline struct cros_ec_pwm_device *pwm_to_cros_ec_pwm(struct pwm_chip *c)
> +{
> + return container_of(c, struct cros_ec_pwm_device, chip);
> +}
> +
> +static int cros_ec_pwm_set_duty(struct cros_ec_pwm_device *ec_pwm,
> + struct pwm_device *pwm,
> + uint16_t duty)
Given you seprated the pwm stuff from the EC stuff and focusing on
sending a EC command here, the first parameter should be of
cros_ec_device* instead of cros_ec_pwm_device*.
> +{
> + struct cros_ec_device *ec = ec_pwm->ec;
> + struct ec_params_pwm_set_duty *params;
> + struct cros_ec_command *msg;
> + int ret;
> +
> + msg = kzalloc(sizeof(*msg) + sizeof(*params), GFP_KERNEL);
Use an ad-hoc data structure on the stack, so you will always be able
to send the command to the EC.
> + if (!msg)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + params = (void *)&msg->data[0];
> +
> + msg->version = 0;
> + msg->command = EC_CMD_PWM_SET_DUTY;
> + msg->insize = 0;
> + msg->outsize = sizeof(*params);
> +
> + params->duty = duty;
> + params->pwm_type = EC_PWM_TYPE_GENERIC;
> + params->index = pwm->hwpwm;
> +
> + ret = cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status(ec, msg);
> + kfree(msg);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static int cros_ec_pwm_get_duty(struct cros_ec_pwm_device *ec_pwm,
> + struct pwm_device *pwm)
Idem.
> +{
> + struct cros_ec_device *ec = ec_pwm->ec;
> + struct ec_params_pwm_get_duty *params;
> + struct ec_response_pwm_get_duty *resp;
> + struct cros_ec_command *msg;
> + int ret;
> +
> + msg = kzalloc(sizeof(*msg) + max(sizeof(*params), sizeof(*resp)),
Idem.
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!msg)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + params = (void *)&msg->data[0];
> + resp = (void *)&msg->data[0];
> +
> + msg->version = 0;
> + msg->command = EC_CMD_PWM_GET_DUTY;
> + msg->insize = sizeof(*params);
> + msg->outsize = sizeof(*resp);
> +
> + params->pwm_type = EC_PWM_TYPE_GENERIC;
> + params->index = pwm->hwpwm;
> +
> + ret = cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status(ec, msg);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + goto out;
> +
> + ret = resp->duty;
> +
> +out:
> + kfree(msg);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static int cros_ec_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
> + struct pwm_state *state)
> +{
> + struct cros_ec_pwm_device *ec_pwm = pwm_to_cros_ec_pwm(chip);
> +
> + /* The EC won't let us change the period */
> + if (state->period != EC_PWM_MAX_DUTY)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + return cros_ec_pwm_set_duty(ec_pwm, pwm, state->duty_cycle);
I would use ec_pwm->ec here.
> +}
> +
> +static void cros_ec_pwm_get_state(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
> + struct pwm_state *state)
> +{
> + struct cros_ec_pwm_device *ec_pwm = pwm_to_cros_ec_pwm(chip);
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = cros_ec_pwm_get_duty(ec_pwm, pwm);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(chip->dev, "error getting initial duty: %d\n", ret);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + state->enabled = (ret > 0);
> + state->period = EC_PWM_MAX_DUTY;
> + state->duty_cycle = ret;
> +}
> +
> +static struct pwm_device *
> +cros_ec_pwm_xlate(struct pwm_chip *pc, const struct of_phandle_args *args)
> +{
> + struct pwm_device *pwm;
> +
> + if (args->args[0] >= pc->npwm)
> + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> +
> + pwm = pwm_request_from_chip(pc, args->args[0], NULL);
> + if (IS_ERR(pwm))
> + return pwm;
> +
> + /* The EC won't let us change the period */
> + pwm->args.period = EC_PWM_MAX_DUTY;
> +
> + return pwm;
> +}
> +
> +static const struct pwm_ops cros_ec_pwm_ops = {
> + .get_state = cros_ec_pwm_get_state,
> + .apply = cros_ec_pwm_apply,
> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> +};
> +
> +static int cros_ec_pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct cros_ec_device *ec = dev_get_drvdata(pdev->dev.parent);
> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> + struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
> + struct cros_ec_pwm_device *ec_pwm;
> + struct pwm_chip *chip;
> + u32 val;
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (!ec) {
> + dev_err(dev, "no parent EC device\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + ec_pwm = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*ec_pwm), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!ec_pwm)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + chip = &ec_pwm->chip;
> + ec_pwm->ec = ec;
> +
> + /* PWM chip */
> + chip->dev = dev;
> + chip->ops = &cros_ec_pwm_ops;
> + chip->of_xlate = cros_ec_pwm_xlate;
> + chip->of_pwm_n_cells = 1;
> + chip->base = -1;
> + ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "google,max-pwms", &val);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(dev, "Couldn't read max-pwms property: %d\n", ret);
Does it mean this driver does not work when device tree is not used by
the platform?
The rest of the driver still compiles.
> + return ret;
> + }
> + /* The index field is only 8 bits */
> + if (val > U8_MAX) {
> + dev_err(dev, "Can't support %u PWMs\n", val);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> + chip->npwm = val;
> +
> + ret = pwmchip_add(chip);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(dev, "cannot register PWM: %d\n", ret);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, ec_pwm);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static int cros_ec_pwm_remove(struct platform_device *dev)
> +{
> + struct cros_ec_pwm_device *ec_pwm = platform_get_drvdata(dev);
> + struct pwm_chip *chip = &ec_pwm->chip;
> +
> + return pwmchip_remove(chip);
> +}
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF
> +static const struct of_device_id cros_ec_pwm_of_match[] = {
> + { .compatible = "google,cros-ec-pwm" },
> + {},
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, cros_ec_pwm_of_match);
> +#endif
> +
> +static struct platform_driver cros_ec_pwm_driver = {
> + .probe = cros_ec_pwm_probe,
> + .remove = cros_ec_pwm_remove,
> + .driver = {
> + .name = "cros-ec-pwm",
> + .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(cros_ec_pwm_of_match),
> + },
> +};
> +module_platform_driver(cros_ec_pwm_driver);
> +
> +MODULE_ALIAS("platform:cros-ec-pwm");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("ChromeOS EC PWM driver");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> --
> 2.8.0.rc3.226.g39d4020
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists