Message-ID: <20201208182637.hm5uzuw5ueelo26k@pengutronix.de>
Date:   Tue, 8 Dec 2020 19:26:37 +0100
From:   Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>
Cc:     Clemens Gruber <clemens.gruber@...ruber.com>,
        linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        David Jander <david@...tonic.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] pwm: pca9685: Switch to atomic API

Hello Thierry, hello Sven,

On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 05:57:12PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 09:44:42AM -0500, Sven Van Asbroeck wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 4:10 AM Uwe Kleine-König
> > <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > If this is already in the old code, this probably warrants a separate
> > > fix, and yes, I consider this a severe bug. (Consider one channel
> > > driving a motor and reconfiguring an LED modifies the motor's speed.)
> > >
> > 
> > I think you are 100% correct, this would be a severe bug. I have only used
> > this chip to drive LEDs, where the actual period is not that important. But
> > for motor control, it's a different story.
> > 
> > Basically you are suggesting: the period (prescaler) can only be changed iff
> > its use-count is 1.
> > 
> > This however brings up a whole load of additional questions: consider the case
> > where the chip outputs are also used in gpio mode. the gpio functionality
> > only sets "full on" and "full off" bits. On a scope, a gpio output will look
> > identical, no matter the value of the period. So when a gpio output is in use,
> > does it increment the prescaler use-count ?
> > 
> > Example:
> > 1. output 1: set pwm mode (enabled=true, duty_cycle=50%, period=1/200Hz)
> > 2. output 2: set led mode (full-on bit set)
> > 3. output 1: change period(enabled=true, duty_cycle=50%, period=1/100Hz)
> > 
> > Do we have to make (3) fail? I would say no: although output 2 is in use,
> > it's not actually using the prescaler. Changing prescale won't modify
> > output 2 in any way.
> > 
> > Which brings us to an even trickier question: what happens if a pwm output
> > is set to 0% or 100% duty cycle? In that case, it'll behave like a gpio output.
> > So when it's enabled, it does not use the prescaler.
> > But! what happens if we now set that output to a different duty cycle?
> > 
> > Example:
> > 1. output 1: set pwm mode (enabled=true, duty_cycle=50%,  period=1/200Hz)
> > 2. output 2: set pwm mode (enabled=true, duty_cycle=100%, period=1/400Hz)
> >   fail? no, because it's not actually using the period (it's full on)
> > 3. output 2: set pwm mode (enabled=true, duty_cycle=100%, period=1/200Hz)
> >   fail? no, because it's not actually using the period (it's full on)
> > 4. output 1: set pwm mode (enabled=true, duty_cycle=50%,  period=1/400Hz)
> >   fail? no, because only output 1 is using the prescaler
> > 5. output 2: set pwm mode (enabled=true, duty_cycle=50%, period=1/400Hz)
> >   fail? no, because output 2 is not changing the prescaler
> > 6. output 2: set pwm mode (enabled=true, duty_cycle=50%, period=1/200Hz)
> >   fail? yes, because output 2 is changing prescaler and it's already in use
> > 
> > IMHO all this can get very complicated and tricky.
> 
> Is this really that complicated?

I think it is.

> I sounds to me like the only thing that you need is to have some sort
> of usage count for the prescaler. Whenever you want to use the
> prescaler you check that usage count. If it is zero, then you can just
> set it to whatever you need. If it isn't zero, that means somebody
> else is already using it and you can't change it, which means you have
> to check if you're trying to request the value that's already set. If
> so, you can succeed, but otherwise you'll have to fail.

With this abstraction Sven's questions are changed to:

Does a PWM that runs at 0% or 100% use the prescaler?

If yes, you limit the possibilities of the brother channels. And if not,
it will not be possible to go to a 50% relative duty cycle while
retaining the period. Both sounds not optimal.
 
> > We can of course make this much simpler by assumung that gpio or on/off pwms
> > are actually using the prescaler. But then we'd be limiting this chip's
> > functionality.
> 
> Yeah, this is obviously much simpler, but the cost is a bit high, in my
> opinion. I'm fine with this alternative if there aren't any use-cases
> where multiple outputs are actually used.

This metric is wishy-washy; of course you can construct a use-case. I'd
still go for this simpler option and assume the prescaler used if the
PWM runs at 0% or 100%, but not when it is a GPIO.

Best regards
Uwe


-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists