[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160603202859.GD124478@google.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 13:28:59 -0700
From: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>
Cc: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Milo Kim <milo.kim@...com>,
Doug Anderson <dianders@...gle.com>,
Caesar Wang <wxt@...k-chips.com>,
Stephen Barber <smbarber@...omium.org>,
Ajit Pal Singh <ajitpal.singh@...com>,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...il.com>,
Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@...com>,
Patrice Chotard <patrice.chotard@...com>, kernel@...inux.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/14] pwm: rockchip: Avoid glitches on already running
PWMs
Hi,
Just noticed a few things:
On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 10:23:03AM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> The current logic will disable the PWM clk even if the PWM was left
> enabled by the bootloader (because it's controlling a critical device
> like a regulator for example).
> Keep the PWM clk enabled if the PWM is enabled to avoid any glitches.
>
> Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>
> ---
> drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c
> index dfacf7d..798a787 100644
> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c
> @@ -299,6 +299,7 @@ static int rockchip_pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> const struct of_device_id *id;
> struct rockchip_pwm_chip *pc;
> + struct pwm_state state;
> struct resource *r;
> int ret;
>
> @@ -319,7 +320,7 @@ static int rockchip_pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> if (IS_ERR(pc->clk))
> return PTR_ERR(pc->clk);
>
> - ret = clk_prepare(pc->clk);
> + ret = clk_prepare_enable(pc->clk);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> @@ -342,12 +343,33 @@ static int rockchip_pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> dev_err(&pdev->dev, "pwmchip_add() failed: %d\n", ret);
> }
>
> + /* Keep the PWM clk enabled if the PWM appears to be up and running. */
> + pwm_get_state(pc->chip.pwms, &state);
> + if (!state.enabled)
Why not just if (!pwm_is_enabled())?
> + clk_disable(pc->clk);
> +
> return ret;
> }
>
> static int rockchip_pwm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> struct rockchip_pwm_chip *pc = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> + struct pwm_state state;
> +
> + /*
> + * Disable the PWM clk before unpreparing it if the PWM device is still
> + * running. This should only happen when the last PWM user left it
> + * enabled, or when nobody requested a PWM that was previously enabled
> + * by the bootloader.
> + *
> + * FIXME: Maybe the core should disable all PWM devices in
> + * pwmchip_remove(). In this case we'd only have to call
> + * clk_unprepare() after pwmchip_remove().
> + *
> + */
> + pwm_get_state(pc->chip.pwms, &state);
> + if (state.enabled)
Same here.
With that:
Reviewed-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
And it tests out fine:
Tested-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
> + clk_disable(pc->clk);
>
> clk_unprepare(pc->clk);
>
> --
> 2.7.4
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists