[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20230907161242.67190-5-ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2023 17:12:40 +0100
From: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk>
To: linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk, u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Greentime Hu <greentime.hu@...ive.com>,
jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com,
William Salmon <william.salmon@...ive.com>,
Jude Onyenegecha <jude.onyenegecha@...ive.com>
Subject: [PATCH v9 4/6] pwm: dwc: use clock rate in hz to avoid rounding issues
As noted, the clock-rate when not a nice multiple of ns is probably
going to end up with inacurate calculations, as well as on a non pci
system the rate may change (although we've not put a clock rate
change notifier in this code yet) so we also add some quick checks
of the rate when we do any calculations with it.
Signed-off-by; Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk>
Reported-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
---
v9:
- fixed commit spelling
- changed to use codethink email instead of sifive
v8:
- fixup post rename
- move to earlier in series
---
drivers/pwm/pwm-dwc-core.c | 24 +++++++++++++++---------
drivers/pwm/pwm-dwc.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-dwc-core.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-dwc-core.c
index 3fc281a78c9a..3b856685029d 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-dwc-core.c
+++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-dwc-core.c
@@ -49,13 +49,14 @@ static int __dwc_pwm_configure_timer(struct dwc_pwm *dwc,
* periods and check are the result within HW limits between 1 and
* 2^32 periods.
*/
- tmp = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(state->duty_cycle, dwc->clk_ns);
+ tmp = state->duty_cycle * dwc->clk_rate;
+ tmp = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(tmp, NSEC_PER_SEC);
if (tmp < 1 || tmp > (1ULL << 32))
return -ERANGE;
low = tmp - 1;
- tmp = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(state->period - state->duty_cycle,
- dwc->clk_ns);
+ tmp = (state->period - state->duty_cycle) * dwc->clk_rate;
+ tmp = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(tmp, NSEC_PER_SEC);
if (tmp < 1 || tmp > (1ULL << 32))
return -ERANGE;
high = tmp - 1;
@@ -121,11 +122,14 @@ static int dwc_pwm_get_state(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
struct pwm_state *state)
{
struct dwc_pwm *dwc = to_dwc_pwm(chip);
+ unsigned long clk_rate;
u64 duty, period;
u32 ctrl, ld, ld2;
pm_runtime_get_sync(chip->dev);
+ clk_rate = dwc->clk_rate;
+
ctrl = dwc_pwm_readl(dwc, DWC_TIM_CTRL(pwm->hwpwm));
ld = dwc_pwm_readl(dwc, DWC_TIM_LD_CNT(pwm->hwpwm));
ld2 = dwc_pwm_readl(dwc, DWC_TIM_LD_CNT2(pwm->hwpwm));
@@ -137,17 +141,19 @@ static int dwc_pwm_get_state(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
* based on the timer load-count only.
*/
if (ctrl & DWC_TIM_CTRL_PWM) {
- duty = (ld + 1) * dwc->clk_ns;
- period = (ld2 + 1) * dwc->clk_ns;
+ duty = ld + 1;
+ period = ld2 + 1;
period += duty;
} else {
- duty = (ld + 1) * dwc->clk_ns;
+ duty = ld + 1;
period = duty * 2;
}
+ duty *= NSEC_PER_SEC;
+ period *= NSEC_PER_SEC;
+ state->period = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(period, clk_rate);
+ state->duty_cycle = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(duty, clk_rate);
state->polarity = PWM_POLARITY_INVERSED;
- state->period = period;
- state->duty_cycle = duty;
pm_runtime_put_sync(chip->dev);
@@ -168,7 +174,7 @@ struct dwc_pwm *dwc_pwm_alloc(struct device *dev)
if (!dwc)
return NULL;
- dwc->clk_ns = 10;
+ dwc->clk_rate = NSEC_PER_SEC / 10;
dwc->chip.dev = dev;
dwc->chip.ops = &dwc_pwm_ops;
dwc->chip.npwm = DWC_TIMERS_TOTAL;
diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-dwc.h b/drivers/pwm/pwm-dwc.h
index 64795247c54c..e0a940fd6e87 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-dwc.h
+++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-dwc.h
@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ struct dwc_pwm_ctx {
struct dwc_pwm {
struct pwm_chip chip;
void __iomem *base;
- unsigned int clk_ns;
+ unsigned long clk_rate;
struct dwc_pwm_ctx ctx[DWC_TIMERS_TOTAL];
};
#define to_dwc_pwm(p) (container_of((p), struct dwc_pwm, chip))
--
2.40.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists