[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210408173637.w26njwystfuyrgan@pengutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2021 19:36:37 +0200
From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Clemens Gruber <clemens.gruber@...ruber.com>
Cc: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org, Sven Van Asbroeck <TheSven73@...il.com>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 5/8] pwm: core: Support new PWM_STAGGERING_ALLOWED flag
On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 05:51:36PM +0200, Clemens Gruber wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 02:50:40PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > Yes, I think that's basically what this is saying. I think we're perhaps
> > getting hung up on the terminology here. PWM_STAGGERING_ALLOWED gives
> > the impression that we're dealing with some provider-specific feature,
> > whereas what we really want to express is that the PWM doesn't care
> > exactly when the active cycle starts and based on that a provider that
> > can support it may optimize the EMI behavior.
> >
> > Maybe we can find a better name for this? Ultimately what this means is
> > that the consumer is primarily interested in the power output of the PWM
> > rather than the exact shape of the signal. So perhaps something like
> > PWM_USAGE_POWER would be more appropriate.
>
> Yes, although it would then no longer be obvious that this feature leads
> to improved EMI behavior, as long as we mention that in the docs, I
> think it's a good idea
>
> Maybe document it as follows?
> PWM_USAGE_POWER - Allow the driver to delay the start of the cycle
> for EMI improvements, as long as the power output stays the same
I don't like both names, because for someone who is only halfway into
PWM stuff it is not understandable. Maybe ALLOW_PHASE_SHIFT?
When a consumer is only interested in the power output than
.period = 20
.duty_cycle = 5
would also be an allowed response for the request
.period = 200
.duty_cycle = 50
and this is not what is in the focus here.
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