Date:   Thu, 13 Oct 2016 00:15:40 +0200
From:   Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...ess.pl>
To:     Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>,
        Bhuvanchandra DV <bhuvanchandra.dv@...adex.com>
Cc:     shawnguo@...nel.org, thierry.reding@...il.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        mark.rutland@....com, kernel@...gutronix.de, fabio.estevam@....com,
        linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Lothar Wassmann <LW@...o-electronics.de>,
        boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] pwm: imx: support output polarity inversion

Hi Stefan,

> On 2016-10-07 08:11, Bhuvanchandra DV wrote:
> > From: Lothar Wassmann <LW@...O-electronics.de>
> > 
> > The i.MX pwm unit on i.MX27 and newer SoCs provides a configurable
> > output polarity. This patch adds support to utilize this feature
> > where available.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Lothar Waßmann <LW@...O-electronics.de>
> > Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...sung.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Bhuvanchandra DV <bhuvanchandra.dv@...adex.com>
> > Acked-by: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...aro.org>
> > Reviewed-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/imx-pwm.txt |  6 +--
> >  drivers/pwm/pwm-imx.c                             | 51
> > +++++++++++++++++++++-- 2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 6
> > deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/imx-pwm.txt
> > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/imx-pwm.txt
> > index e00c2e9..c61bdf8 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/imx-pwm.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/imx-pwm.txt
> > @@ -6,8 +6,8 @@ Required properties:
> >    - "fsl,imx1-pwm" for PWM compatible with the one integrated on
> > i.MX1
> >    - "fsl,imx27-pwm" for PWM compatible with the one integrated on
> > i.MX27
> >  - reg: physical base address and length of the controller's
> > registers -- #pwm-cells: should be 2. See pwm.txt in this directory
> > for a description of
> > -  the cells format.
> > +- #pwm-cells: 2 for i.MX1 and 3 for i.MX27 and newer SoCs. See
> > pwm.txt
> > +  in this directory for a description of the cells format.
> >  - clocks : Clock specifiers for both ipg and per clocks.
> >  - clock-names : Clock names should include both "ipg" and "per"
> >  See the clock consumer binding,
> > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ See the clock consumer binding,
> >  Example:
> >  
> >  pwm1: pwm@...b4000 {
> > -	#pwm-cells = <2>;
> > +	#pwm-cells = <3>;
> >  	compatible = "fsl,imx53-pwm", "fsl,imx27-pwm";
> >  	reg = <0x53fb4000 0x4000>;
> >  	clocks = <&clks IMX5_CLK_PWM1_IPG_GATE>,
> > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx.c
> > index d600fd5..c37d223 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx.c
> > @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@
> >  #define MX3_PWMCR_DOZEEN		(1 << 24)
> >  #define MX3_PWMCR_WAITEN		(1 << 23)
> >  #define MX3_PWMCR_DBGEN			(1 << 22)
> > +#define MX3_PWMCR_POUTC			(1 << 18)
> >  #define MX3_PWMCR_CLKSRC_IPG_HIGH	(2 << 16)
> >  #define MX3_PWMCR_CLKSRC_IPG		(1 << 16)
> >  #define MX3_PWMCR_SWR			(1 << 3)
> > @@ -180,6 +181,9 @@ static int imx_pwm_config_v2(struct pwm_chip
> > *chip, if (enable)
> >  		cr |= MX3_PWMCR_EN;
> >  
> > +	if (pwm->args.polarity == PWM_POLARITY_INVERSED)
> > +		cr |= MX3_PWMCR_POUTC;
> > +
> 
> This seems wrong to me, the config callback is meant for period/duty
> cycle only.

If it is meant only for that, then the polarity should be removed from
it.

However after very quick testing, at least on my setup, it turns out
that removing this lines causes polarity to _not_ being set (and the
polarity is not inverted).

I will investigate this further on my setup and hopefully sent proper
patch.

> The set_polarity callback should get called in case a
> different polarity is requested.

On my setup the pwm2 is set from DT and pwm_backlight_probe() calls
pwm_apply_args(), so everything should work. However, as I mentioned
above there still is some problem with inversion setting.

> 
> 
> >  	writel(cr, imx->mmio_base + MX3_PWMCR);
> >  
> >  	return 0;
> > @@ -240,27 +244,62 @@ static void imx_pwm_disable(struct pwm_chip
> > *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm)
> >  	clk_disable_unprepare(imx->clk_per);
> >  }
> >  
> > -static struct pwm_ops imx_pwm_ops = {
> > +static int imx_pwm_set_polarity(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct
> > pwm_device *pwm,
> > +				enum pwm_polarity polarity)
> > +{
> > +	struct imx_chip *imx = to_imx_chip(chip);
> > +	u32 val;
> > +
> > +	if (polarity == pwm->args.polarity)
> > +		return 0;
> 
> I don't think that this is right. Today, pwm_apply_args (in
> include/linux/pwm.h) copies the polarity from args to state.polarity,
> which is then passed as polarity argument to this function. So this
> will always return 0 afaict.

Yes, I've overlooked it (that the state is copied).

It can be dropped.

> 
> I would just drop that.
> 
> There is probably one little problem in the current state of affairs:
> If the bootloader makes use of a PWM channel with inverted state,
> then the kernel would not know about that and currently assume a
> wrong initial state... I guess at one point in time we should
> implement the state retrieval callback and move to the new atomic PWM
> API, which would mean to implement apply callback.

Are there any patches on the horizon?

> 
> --
> Stefan
> 
> 
> > +
> > +	val = readl(imx->mmio_base + MX3_PWMCR);
> > +
> > +	if (polarity == PWM_POLARITY_INVERSED)
> > +		val |= MX3_PWMCR_POUTC;
> > +	else
> > +		val &= ~MX3_PWMCR_POUTC;
> > +
> > +	writel(val, imx->mmio_base + MX3_PWMCR);
> > +
> > +	dev_dbg(imx->chip.dev, "%s: polarity set to %s\n",
> > __func__,
> > +		polarity == PWM_POLARITY_INVERSED ? "inverted" :
> > "normal"); +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static struct pwm_ops imx_pwm_ops_v1 = {
> >  	.enable = imx_pwm_enable,
> >  	.disable = imx_pwm_disable,
> >  	.config = imx_pwm_config,
> >  	.owner = THIS_MODULE,
> >  };
> >  
> > +static struct pwm_ops imx_pwm_ops_v2 = {
> > +	.enable = imx_pwm_enable,
> > +	.disable = imx_pwm_disable,
> > +	.set_polarity = imx_pwm_set_polarity,
> > +	.config = imx_pwm_config,
> > +	.owner = THIS_MODULE,
> > +};
> > +
> >  struct imx_pwm_data {
> >  	int (*config)(struct pwm_chip *chip,
> >  		struct pwm_device *pwm, int duty_ns, int
> > period_ns); void (*set_enable)(struct pwm_chip *chip, bool enable);
> > +	struct pwm_ops *pwm_ops;
> >  };
> >  
> >  static struct imx_pwm_data imx_pwm_data_v1 = {
> >  	.config = imx_pwm_config_v1,
> >  	.set_enable = imx_pwm_set_enable_v1,
> > +	.pwm_ops = &imx_pwm_ops_v1,
> >  };
> >  
> >  static struct imx_pwm_data imx_pwm_data_v2 = {
> >  	.config = imx_pwm_config_v2,
> >  	.set_enable = imx_pwm_set_enable_v2,
> > +	.pwm_ops = &imx_pwm_ops_v2,
> >  };
> >  
> >  static const struct of_device_id imx_pwm_dt_ids[] = {
> > @@ -282,6 +321,8 @@ static int imx_pwm_probe(struct platform_device
> > *pdev) if (!of_id)
> >  		return -ENODEV;
> >  
> > +	data = of_id->data;
> > +
> >  	imx = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*imx), GFP_KERNEL);
> >  	if (imx == NULL)
> >  		return -ENOMEM;
> > @@ -300,18 +341,22 @@ static int imx_pwm_probe(struct
> > platform_device *pdev) return PTR_ERR(imx->clk_ipg);
> >  	}
> >  
> > -	imx->chip.ops = &imx_pwm_ops;
> > +	imx->chip.ops = data->pwm_ops;
> >  	imx->chip.dev = &pdev->dev;
> >  	imx->chip.base = -1;
> >  	imx->chip.npwm = 1;
> >  	imx->chip.can_sleep = true;
> > +	if (data->pwm_ops->set_polarity) {
> > +		dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "PWM supports output
> > inversion\n");
> > +		imx->chip.of_xlate = of_pwm_xlate_with_flags;
> > +		imx->chip.of_pwm_n_cells = 3;
> > +	}
> >  
> >  	r = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> >  	imx->mmio_base = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, r);
> >  	if (IS_ERR(imx->mmio_base))
> >  		return PTR_ERR(imx->mmio_base);
> >  
> > -	data = of_id->data;
> >  	imx->config = data->config;
> >  	imx->set_enable = data->set_enable;
> 

Best regards,

Łukasz Majewski

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

Powered by blists - more mailing lists