From 1cc2e1faafb3b5a2be25112559bdb495736b5af7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Uwe Kleine-König Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2024 10:57:57 +0200 Subject: pwm: Add more locking MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit This ensures that a pwm_chip that has no corresponding driver isn't used and that a driver doesn't go away while a callback is still running. In the presence of device links this isn't necessary yet (so this is no fix) but for pwm character device support this is needed. To not serialize all pwm_apply_state() calls, this introduces a per chip lock. An additional complication is that for atomic chips a mutex cannot be used (as pwm_apply_atomic() must not sleep) and a spinlock cannot be held while calling an operation for a sleeping chip. So depending on the chip being atomic or not a spinlock or a mutex is used. An additional change implemented here is that on driver remove the .free() callback is called for each requested pwm_device. This is the right time because later (e.g. when the consumer calls pwm_put()) the free function is (maybe) not available any more. Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/026aa891c8270a11723a1ba7e4256f456f7e1e86.1726819463.git.u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König --- drivers/pwm/core.c | 100 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 92 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) (limited to 'drivers/pwm/core.c') diff --git a/drivers/pwm/core.c b/drivers/pwm/core.c index 6e752e148b98..5a095eb46b54 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/core.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/core.c @@ -31,6 +31,24 @@ static DEFINE_MUTEX(pwm_lock); static DEFINE_IDR(pwm_chips); +static void pwmchip_lock(struct pwm_chip *chip) +{ + if (chip->atomic) + spin_lock(&chip->atomic_lock); + else + mutex_lock(&chip->nonatomic_lock); +} + +static void pwmchip_unlock(struct pwm_chip *chip) +{ + if (chip->atomic) + spin_unlock(&chip->atomic_lock); + else + mutex_unlock(&chip->nonatomic_lock); +} + +DEFINE_GUARD(pwmchip, struct pwm_chip *, pwmchip_lock(_T), pwmchip_unlock(_T)) + static void pwm_apply_debug(struct pwm_device *pwm, const struct pwm_state *state) { @@ -220,6 +238,7 @@ static int __pwm_apply(struct pwm_device *pwm, const struct pwm_state *state) int pwm_apply_might_sleep(struct pwm_device *pwm, const struct pwm_state *state) { int err; + struct pwm_chip *chip = pwm->chip; /* * Some lowlevel driver's implementations of .apply() make use of @@ -230,7 +249,12 @@ int pwm_apply_might_sleep(struct pwm_device *pwm, const struct pwm_state *state) */ might_sleep(); - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PWM_DEBUG) && pwm->chip->atomic) { + guard(pwmchip)(chip); + + if (!chip->operational) + return -ENODEV; + + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PWM_DEBUG) && chip->atomic) { /* * Catch any drivers that have been marked as atomic but * that will sleep anyway. @@ -254,9 +278,16 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pwm_apply_might_sleep); */ int pwm_apply_atomic(struct pwm_device *pwm, const struct pwm_state *state) { - WARN_ONCE(!pwm->chip->atomic, + struct pwm_chip *chip = pwm->chip; + + WARN_ONCE(!chip->atomic, "sleeping PWM driver used in atomic context\n"); + guard(pwmchip)(chip); + + if (!chip->operational) + return -ENODEV; + return __pwm_apply(pwm, state); } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pwm_apply_atomic); @@ -334,8 +365,18 @@ static int pwm_capture(struct pwm_device *pwm, struct pwm_capture *result, if (!ops->capture) return -ENOSYS; + /* + * Holding the pwm_lock is probably not needed. If you use pwm_capture() + * and you're interested to speed it up, please convince yourself it's + * really not needed, test and then suggest a patch on the mailing list. + */ guard(mutex)(&pwm_lock); + guard(pwmchip)(chip); + + if (!chip->operational) + return -ENODEV; + return ops->capture(chip, pwm, result, timeout); } @@ -368,6 +409,14 @@ static int pwm_device_request(struct pwm_device *pwm, const char *label) if (test_bit(PWMF_REQUESTED, &pwm->flags)) return -EBUSY; + /* + * This function is called while holding pwm_lock. As .operational only + * changes while holding this lock, checking it here without holding the + * chip lock is fine. + */ + if (!chip->operational) + return -ENODEV; + if (!try_module_get(chip->owner)) return -ENODEV; @@ -396,7 +445,9 @@ err_get_device: */ struct pwm_state state = { 0, }; - err = ops->get_state(chip, pwm, &state); + scoped_guard(pwmchip, chip) + err = ops->get_state(chip, pwm, &state); + trace_pwm_get(pwm, &state, err); if (!err) @@ -1020,6 +1071,7 @@ struct pwm_chip *pwmchip_alloc(struct device *parent, unsigned int npwm, size_t chip->npwm = npwm; chip->uses_pwmchip_alloc = true; + chip->operational = false; pwmchip_dev = &chip->dev; device_initialize(pwmchip_dev); @@ -1125,6 +1177,11 @@ int __pwmchip_add(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct module *owner) chip->owner = owner; + if (chip->atomic) + spin_lock_init(&chip->atomic_lock); + else + mutex_init(&chip->nonatomic_lock); + guard(mutex)(&pwm_lock); ret = idr_alloc(&pwm_chips, chip, 0, 0, GFP_KERNEL); @@ -1138,6 +1195,9 @@ int __pwmchip_add(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct module *owner) if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)) of_pwmchip_add(chip); + scoped_guard(pwmchip, chip) + chip->operational = true; + ret = device_add(&chip->dev); if (ret) goto err_device_add; @@ -1145,6 +1205,9 @@ int __pwmchip_add(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct module *owner) return 0; err_device_add: + scoped_guard(pwmchip, chip) + chip->operational = false; + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)) of_pwmchip_remove(chip); @@ -1164,11 +1227,27 @@ void pwmchip_remove(struct pwm_chip *chip) { pwmchip_sysfs_unexport(chip); - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)) - of_pwmchip_remove(chip); + scoped_guard(mutex, &pwm_lock) { + unsigned int i; + + scoped_guard(pwmchip, chip) + chip->operational = false; + + for (i = 0; i < chip->npwm; ++i) { + struct pwm_device *pwm = &chip->pwms[i]; + + if (test_and_clear_bit(PWMF_REQUESTED, &pwm->flags)) { + dev_warn(&chip->dev, "Freeing requested PWM #%u\n", i); + if (pwm->chip->ops->free) + pwm->chip->ops->free(pwm->chip, pwm); + } + } + + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)) + of_pwmchip_remove(chip); - scoped_guard(mutex, &pwm_lock) idr_remove(&pwm_chips, chip->id); + } device_del(&chip->dev); } @@ -1538,12 +1617,17 @@ void pwm_put(struct pwm_device *pwm) guard(mutex)(&pwm_lock); - if (!test_and_clear_bit(PWMF_REQUESTED, &pwm->flags)) { + /* + * Trigger a warning if a consumer called pwm_put() twice. + * If the chip isn't operational, PWMF_REQUESTED was already cleared in + * pwmchip_remove(). So don't warn in this case. + */ + if (chip->operational && !test_and_clear_bit(PWMF_REQUESTED, &pwm->flags)) { pr_warn("PWM device already freed\n"); return; } - if (chip->ops->free) + if (chip->operational && chip->ops->free) pwm->chip->ops->free(pwm->chip, pwm); pwm->label = NULL; -- cgit From 17e40c25158f2505cbcdeda96624afcbab4af368 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Uwe Kleine-König Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2024 10:57:58 +0200 Subject: pwm: New abstraction for PWM waveforms MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Up to now the configuration of a PWM setting is described exclusively by a struct pwm_state which contains information about period, duty_cycle, polarity and if the PWM is enabled. (There is another member usage_power which doesn't completely fit into pwm_state, I ignore it here for simplicity.) Instead of a polarity the new abstraction has a member duty_offset_ns that defines when the rising edge happens after the period start. This is more general, as with a pwm_state the rising edge can only happen at the period's start or such that the falling edge is at the end of the period (i.e. duty_offset_ns == 0 or duty_offset_ns == period_length_ns - duty_length_ns). A disabled PWM is modeled by .period_length_ns = 0. In my eyes this is a nice usage of that otherwise unusable setting, as it doesn't define anything about the future which matches the fact that consumers should consider the state of the output as undefined and it's just there to say "No further requirements about the output, you can save some power.". Further I renamed period and duty_cycle to period_length_ns and duty_length_ns. In the past there was confusion from time to time about duty_cycle being measured in nanoseconds because people expected a percentage of period instead. With "length_ns" as suffix the semantic should be more obvious to people unfamiliar with the pwm subsystem. period is renamed to period_length_ns for consistency. The API for consumers doesn't change yet, but lowlevel drivers can implement callbacks that work with pwm_waveforms instead of pwm_states. A new thing about these callbacks is that the calculation of hardware settings needed to implement a certain waveform is separated from actually writing these settings. The motivation for that is that this allows a consumer to query the hardware capabilities without actually modifying the hardware state. The rounding rules that are expected to be implemented in the round_waveform_tohw() are: First pick the biggest possible period not bigger than wf->period_length_ns. For that period pick the biggest possible duty setting not bigger than wf->duty_length_ns. Third pick the biggest possible offset not bigger than wf->duty_offset_ns. If the requested period is too small for the hardware, it's expected that a setting with the minimal period and duty_length_ns = duty_offset_ns = 0 is returned and this fact is signaled by a return value of 1. Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König Tested-by: Trevor Gamblin Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/df0faa33bf9e7c9e2e5eab8d31bbf61e861bd401.1726819463.git.u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com [ukleinek: Update pwm_check_rounding() to return bool instead of int.] Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König --- drivers/pwm/core.c | 234 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 213 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) (limited to 'drivers/pwm/core.c') diff --git a/drivers/pwm/core.c b/drivers/pwm/core.c index 5a095eb46b54..bbe7bfdb1549 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/core.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/core.c @@ -49,6 +49,102 @@ static void pwmchip_unlock(struct pwm_chip *chip) DEFINE_GUARD(pwmchip, struct pwm_chip *, pwmchip_lock(_T), pwmchip_unlock(_T)) +static void pwm_wf2state(const struct pwm_waveform *wf, struct pwm_state *state) +{ + if (wf->period_length_ns) { + if (wf->duty_length_ns + wf->duty_offset_ns < wf->period_length_ns) + *state = (struct pwm_state){ + .enabled = true, + .polarity = PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL, + .period = wf->period_length_ns, + .duty_cycle = wf->duty_length_ns, + }; + else + *state = (struct pwm_state){ + .enabled = true, + .polarity = PWM_POLARITY_INVERSED, + .period = wf->period_length_ns, + .duty_cycle = wf->period_length_ns - wf->duty_length_ns, + }; + } else { + *state = (struct pwm_state){ + .enabled = false, + }; + } +} + +static void pwm_state2wf(const struct pwm_state *state, struct pwm_waveform *wf) +{ + if (state->enabled) { + if (state->polarity == PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL) + *wf = (struct pwm_waveform){ + .period_length_ns = state->period, + .duty_length_ns = state->duty_cycle, + .duty_offset_ns = 0, + }; + else + *wf = (struct pwm_waveform){ + .period_length_ns = state->period, + .duty_length_ns = state->period - state->duty_cycle, + .duty_offset_ns = state->duty_cycle, + }; + } else { + *wf = (struct pwm_waveform){ + .period_length_ns = 0, + }; + } +} + +static bool pwm_check_rounding(const struct pwm_waveform *wf, + const struct pwm_waveform *wf_rounded) +{ + if (!wf->period_length_ns) + return true; + + if (wf->period_length_ns < wf_rounded->period_length_ns) + return false; + + if (wf->duty_length_ns < wf_rounded->duty_length_ns) + return false; + + if (wf->duty_offset_ns < wf_rounded->duty_offset_ns) + return false; + + return true; +} + +static int __pwm_round_waveform_tohw(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, + const struct pwm_waveform *wf, void *wfhw) +{ + const struct pwm_ops *ops = chip->ops; + + return ops->round_waveform_tohw(chip, pwm, wf, wfhw); +} + +static int __pwm_round_waveform_fromhw(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, + const void *wfhw, struct pwm_waveform *wf) +{ + const struct pwm_ops *ops = chip->ops; + + return ops->round_waveform_fromhw(chip, pwm, wfhw, wf); +} + +static int __pwm_read_waveform(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, void *wfhw) +{ + const struct pwm_ops *ops = chip->ops; + + return ops->read_waveform(chip, pwm, wfhw); +} + +static int __pwm_write_waveform(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, const void *wfhw) +{ + const struct pwm_ops *ops = chip->ops; + + return ops->write_waveform(chip, pwm, wfhw); +} + +#define WFHWSIZE 20 + static void pwm_apply_debug(struct pwm_device *pwm, const struct pwm_state *state) { @@ -182,6 +278,7 @@ static bool pwm_state_valid(const struct pwm_state *state) static int __pwm_apply(struct pwm_device *pwm, const struct pwm_state *state) { struct pwm_chip *chip; + const struct pwm_ops *ops; int err; if (!pwm || !state) @@ -205,6 +302,7 @@ static int __pwm_apply(struct pwm_device *pwm, const struct pwm_state *state) } chip = pwm->chip; + ops = chip->ops; if (state->period == pwm->state.period && state->duty_cycle == pwm->state.duty_cycle && @@ -213,18 +311,69 @@ static int __pwm_apply(struct pwm_device *pwm, const struct pwm_state *state) state->usage_power == pwm->state.usage_power) return 0; - err = chip->ops->apply(chip, pwm, state); - trace_pwm_apply(pwm, state, err); - if (err) - return err; + if (ops->write_waveform) { + struct pwm_waveform wf; + char wfhw[WFHWSIZE]; - pwm->state = *state; + BUG_ON(WFHWSIZE < ops->sizeof_wfhw); - /* - * only do this after pwm->state was applied as some - * implementations of .get_state depend on this - */ - pwm_apply_debug(pwm, state); + pwm_state2wf(state, &wf); + + /* + * The rounding is wrong here for states with inverted polarity. + * While .apply() rounds down duty_cycle (which represents the + * time from the start of the period to the inner edge), + * .round_waveform_tohw() rounds down the time the PWM is high. + * Can be fixed if the need arises, until reported otherwise + * let's assume that consumers don't care. + */ + + err = __pwm_round_waveform_tohw(chip, pwm, &wf, &wfhw); + if (err) { + if (err > 0) + /* + * This signals an invalid request, typically + * the requested period (or duty_offset) is + * smaller than possible with the hardware. + */ + return -EINVAL; + + return err; + } + + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PWM_DEBUG)) { + struct pwm_waveform wf_rounded; + + err = __pwm_round_waveform_fromhw(chip, pwm, &wfhw, &wf_rounded); + if (err) + return err; + + if (!pwm_check_rounding(&wf, &wf_rounded)) + dev_err(&chip->dev, "Wrong rounding: requested %llu/%llu [+%llu], result %llu/%llu [+%llu]\n", + wf.duty_length_ns, wf.period_length_ns, wf.duty_offset_ns, + wf_rounded.duty_length_ns, wf_rounded.period_length_ns, wf_rounded.duty_offset_ns); + } + + err = __pwm_write_waveform(chip, pwm, &wfhw); + if (err) + return err; + + pwm->state = *state; + + } else { + err = ops->apply(chip, pwm, state); + trace_pwm_apply(pwm, state, err); + if (err) + return err; + + pwm->state = *state; + + /* + * only do this after pwm->state was applied as some + * implementations of .get_state() depend on this + */ + pwm_apply_debug(pwm, state); + } return 0; } @@ -292,6 +441,41 @@ int pwm_apply_atomic(struct pwm_device *pwm, const struct pwm_state *state) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pwm_apply_atomic); +static int pwm_get_state_hw(struct pwm_device *pwm, struct pwm_state *state) +{ + struct pwm_chip *chip = pwm->chip; + const struct pwm_ops *ops = chip->ops; + int ret = -EOPNOTSUPP; + + if (ops->read_waveform) { + char wfhw[WFHWSIZE]; + struct pwm_waveform wf; + + BUG_ON(WFHWSIZE < ops->sizeof_wfhw); + + scoped_guard(pwmchip, chip) { + + ret = __pwm_read_waveform(chip, pwm, &wfhw); + if (ret) + return ret; + + ret = __pwm_round_waveform_fromhw(chip, pwm, &wfhw, &wf); + if (ret) + return ret; + } + + pwm_wf2state(&wf, state); + + } else if (ops->get_state) { + scoped_guard(pwmchip, chip) + ret = ops->get_state(chip, pwm, state); + + trace_pwm_get(pwm, state, ret); + } + + return ret; +} + /** * pwm_adjust_config() - adjust the current PWM config to the PWM arguments * @pwm: PWM device @@ -435,7 +619,7 @@ err_get_device: } } - if (ops->get_state) { + if (ops->read_waveform || ops->get_state) { /* * Zero-initialize state because most drivers are unaware of * .usage_power. The other members of state are supposed to be @@ -445,11 +629,7 @@ err_get_device: */ struct pwm_state state = { 0, }; - scoped_guard(pwmchip, chip) - err = ops->get_state(chip, pwm, &state); - - trace_pwm_get(pwm, &state, err); - + err = pwm_get_state_hw(pwm, &state); if (!err) pwm->state = state; @@ -1136,12 +1316,24 @@ static bool pwm_ops_check(const struct pwm_chip *chip) { const struct pwm_ops *ops = chip->ops; - if (!ops->apply) - return false; + if (ops->write_waveform) { + if (!ops->round_waveform_tohw || + !ops->round_waveform_fromhw || + !ops->write_waveform) + return false; - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PWM_DEBUG) && !ops->get_state) - dev_warn(pwmchip_parent(chip), - "Please implement the .get_state() callback\n"); + if (WFHWSIZE < ops->sizeof_wfhw) { + dev_warn(pwmchip_parent(chip), "WFHWSIZE < %zu\n", ops->sizeof_wfhw); + return false; + } + } else { + if (!ops->apply) + return false; + + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PWM_DEBUG) && !ops->get_state) + dev_warn(pwmchip_parent(chip), + "Please implement the .get_state() callback\n"); + } return true; } -- cgit From 6c5126c6406d1c31e91f5b925c621c1c785366be Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Uwe Kleine-König Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2024 10:57:59 +0200 Subject: pwm: Provide new consumer API functions for waveforms MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Provide API functions for consumers to work with waveforms. Note that one relevant difference between pwm_get_state() and pwm_get_waveform*() is that the latter yields the actually configured hardware state, while the former yields the last state passed to pwm_apply*() and so doesn't account for hardware specific rounding. Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König Tested-by: Trevor Gamblin Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/6c97d27682853f603e18e9196043886dd671845d.1726819463.git.u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König --- drivers/pwm/core.c | 261 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 261 insertions(+) (limited to 'drivers/pwm/core.c') diff --git a/drivers/pwm/core.c b/drivers/pwm/core.c index bbe7bfdb1549..038f17dd2757 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/core.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/core.c @@ -49,6 +49,30 @@ static void pwmchip_unlock(struct pwm_chip *chip) DEFINE_GUARD(pwmchip, struct pwm_chip *, pwmchip_lock(_T), pwmchip_unlock(_T)) +static bool pwm_wf_valid(const struct pwm_waveform *wf) +{ + /* + * For now restrict waveforms to period_length_ns <= S64_MAX to provide + * some space for future extensions. One possibility is to simplify + * representing waveforms with inverted polarity using negative values + * somehow. + */ + if (wf->period_length_ns > S64_MAX) + return false; + + if (wf->duty_length_ns > wf->period_length_ns) + return false; + + /* + * .duty_offset_ns is supposed to be smaller than .period_length_ns, apart + * from the corner case .duty_offset_ns == 0 && .period_length_ns == 0. + */ + if (wf->duty_offset_ns && wf->duty_offset_ns >= wf->period_length_ns) + return false; + + return true; +} + static void pwm_wf2state(const struct pwm_waveform *wf, struct pwm_state *state) { if (wf->period_length_ns) { @@ -95,6 +119,29 @@ static void pwm_state2wf(const struct pwm_state *state, struct pwm_waveform *wf) } } +static int pwmwfcmp(const struct pwm_waveform *a, const struct pwm_waveform *b) +{ + if (a->period_length_ns > b->period_length_ns) + return 1; + + if (a->period_length_ns < b->period_length_ns) + return -1; + + if (a->duty_length_ns > b->duty_length_ns) + return 1; + + if (a->duty_length_ns < b->duty_length_ns) + return -1; + + if (a->duty_offset_ns > b->duty_offset_ns) + return 1; + + if (a->duty_offset_ns < b->duty_offset_ns) + return -1; + + return 0; +} + static bool pwm_check_rounding(const struct pwm_waveform *wf, const struct pwm_waveform *wf_rounded) { @@ -145,6 +192,220 @@ static int __pwm_write_waveform(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, c #define WFHWSIZE 20 +/** + * pwm_round_waveform_might_sleep - Query hardware capabilities + * Cannot be used in atomic context. + * @pwm: PWM device + * @wf: waveform to round and output parameter + * + * Typically a given waveform cannot be implemented exactly by hardware, e.g. + * because hardware only supports coarse period resolution or no duty_offset. + * This function returns the actually implemented waveform if you pass wf to + * pwm_set_waveform_might_sleep now. + * + * Note however that the world doesn't stop turning when you call it, so when + * doing + * + * pwm_round_waveform_might_sleep(mypwm, &wf); + * pwm_set_waveform_might_sleep(mypwm, &wf, true); + * + * the latter might fail, e.g. because an input clock changed its rate between + * these two calls and the waveform determined by + * pwm_round_waveform_might_sleep() cannot be implemented any more. + * + * Returns 0 on success, 1 if there is no valid hardware configuration matching + * the input waveform under the PWM rounding rules or a negative errno. + */ +int pwm_round_waveform_might_sleep(struct pwm_device *pwm, struct pwm_waveform *wf) +{ + struct pwm_chip *chip = pwm->chip; + const struct pwm_ops *ops = chip->ops; + struct pwm_waveform wf_req = *wf; + char wfhw[WFHWSIZE]; + int ret_tohw, ret_fromhw; + + BUG_ON(WFHWSIZE < ops->sizeof_wfhw); + + if (!pwm_wf_valid(wf)) + return -EINVAL; + + guard(pwmchip)(chip); + + if (!chip->operational) + return -ENODEV; + + ret_tohw = __pwm_round_waveform_tohw(chip, pwm, wf, wfhw); + if (ret_tohw < 0) + return ret_tohw; + + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PWM_DEBUG) && ret_tohw > 1) + dev_err(&chip->dev, "Unexpected return value from __pwm_round_waveform_tohw: requested %llu/%llu [+%llu], return value %d\n", + wf_req.duty_length_ns, wf_req.period_length_ns, wf_req.duty_offset_ns, ret_tohw); + + ret_fromhw = __pwm_round_waveform_fromhw(chip, pwm, wfhw, wf); + if (ret_fromhw < 0) + return ret_fromhw; + + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PWM_DEBUG) && ret_fromhw > 0) + dev_err(&chip->dev, "Unexpected return value from __pwm_round_waveform_fromhw: requested %llu/%llu [+%llu], return value %d\n", + wf_req.duty_length_ns, wf_req.period_length_ns, wf_req.duty_offset_ns, ret_tohw); + + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PWM_DEBUG) && + ret_tohw == 0 && !pwm_check_rounding(&wf_req, wf)) + dev_err(&chip->dev, "Wrong rounding: requested %llu/%llu [+%llu], result %llu/%llu [+%llu]\n", + wf_req.duty_length_ns, wf_req.period_length_ns, wf_req.duty_offset_ns, + wf->duty_length_ns, wf->period_length_ns, wf->duty_offset_ns); + + return ret_tohw; +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pwm_round_waveform_might_sleep); + +/** + * pwm_get_waveform_might_sleep - Query hardware about current configuration + * Cannot be used in atomic context. + * @pwm: PWM device + * @wf: output parameter + * + * Stores the current configuration of the PWM in @wf. Note this is the + * equivalent of pwm_get_state_hw() (and not pwm_get_state()) for pwm_waveform. + */ +int pwm_get_waveform_might_sleep(struct pwm_device *pwm, struct pwm_waveform *wf) +{ + struct pwm_chip *chip = pwm->chip; + const struct pwm_ops *ops = chip->ops; + char wfhw[WFHWSIZE]; + int err; + + BUG_ON(WFHWSIZE < ops->sizeof_wfhw); + + guard(pwmchip)(chip); + + if (!chip->operational) + return -ENODEV; + + err = __pwm_read_waveform(chip, pwm, &wfhw); + if (err) + return err; + + return __pwm_round_waveform_fromhw(chip, pwm, &wfhw, wf); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pwm_get_waveform_might_sleep); + +/* Called with the pwmchip lock held */ +static int __pwm_set_waveform(struct pwm_device *pwm, + const struct pwm_waveform *wf, + bool exact) +{ + struct pwm_chip *chip = pwm->chip; + const struct pwm_ops *ops = chip->ops; + char wfhw[WFHWSIZE]; + struct pwm_waveform wf_rounded; + int err; + + BUG_ON(WFHWSIZE < ops->sizeof_wfhw); + + if (!pwm_wf_valid(wf)) + return -EINVAL; + + err = __pwm_round_waveform_tohw(chip, pwm, wf, &wfhw); + if (err) + return err; + + if ((IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PWM_DEBUG) || exact) && wf->period_length_ns) { + err = __pwm_round_waveform_fromhw(chip, pwm, &wfhw, &wf_rounded); + if (err) + return err; + + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PWM_DEBUG) && !pwm_check_rounding(wf, &wf_rounded)) + dev_err(&chip->dev, "Wrong rounding: requested %llu/%llu [+%llu], result %llu/%llu [+%llu]\n", + wf->duty_length_ns, wf->period_length_ns, wf->duty_offset_ns, + wf_rounded.duty_length_ns, wf_rounded.period_length_ns, wf_rounded.duty_offset_ns); + + if (exact && pwmwfcmp(wf, &wf_rounded)) { + dev_dbg(&chip->dev, "Requested no rounding, but %llu/%llu [+%llu] -> %llu/%llu [+%llu]\n", + wf->duty_length_ns, wf->period_length_ns, wf->duty_offset_ns, + wf_rounded.duty_length_ns, wf_rounded.period_length_ns, wf_rounded.duty_offset_ns); + + return 1; + } + } + + err = __pwm_write_waveform(chip, pwm, &wfhw); + if (err) + return err; + + /* update .state */ + pwm_wf2state(wf, &pwm->state); + + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PWM_DEBUG) && ops->read_waveform && wf->period_length_ns) { + struct pwm_waveform wf_set; + + err = __pwm_read_waveform(chip, pwm, &wfhw); + if (err) + /* maybe ignore? */ + return err; + + err = __pwm_round_waveform_fromhw(chip, pwm, &wfhw, &wf_set); + if (err) + /* maybe ignore? */ + return err; + + if (pwmwfcmp(&wf_set, &wf_rounded) != 0) + dev_err(&chip->dev, + "Unexpected setting: requested %llu/%llu [+%llu], expected %llu/%llu [+%llu], set %llu/%llu [+%llu]\n", + wf->duty_length_ns, wf->period_length_ns, wf->duty_offset_ns, + wf_rounded.duty_length_ns, wf_rounded.period_length_ns, wf_rounded.duty_offset_ns, + wf_set.duty_length_ns, wf_set.period_length_ns, wf_set.duty_offset_ns); + } + return 0; +} + +/** + * pwm_set_waveform_might_sleep - Apply a new waveform + * Cannot be used in atomic context. + * @pwm: PWM device + * @wf: The waveform to apply + * @exact: If true no rounding is allowed + * + * Typically a requested waveform cannot be implemented exactly, e.g. because + * you requested .period_length_ns = 100 ns, but the hardware can only set + * periods that are a multiple of 8.5 ns. With that hardware passing exact = + * true results in pwm_set_waveform_might_sleep() failing and returning 1. If + * exact = false you get a period of 93.5 ns (i.e. the biggest period not bigger + * than the requested value). + * Note that even with exact = true, some rounding by less than 1 is + * possible/needed. In the above example requesting .period_length_ns = 94 and + * exact = true, you get the hardware configured with period = 93.5 ns. + */ +int pwm_set_waveform_might_sleep(struct pwm_device *pwm, + const struct pwm_waveform *wf, bool exact) +{ + struct pwm_chip *chip = pwm->chip; + int err; + + might_sleep(); + + guard(pwmchip)(chip); + + if (!chip->operational) + return -ENODEV; + + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PWM_DEBUG) && chip->atomic) { + /* + * Catch any drivers that have been marked as atomic but + * that will sleep anyway. + */ + non_block_start(); + err = __pwm_set_waveform(pwm, wf, exact); + non_block_end(); + } else { + err = __pwm_set_waveform(pwm, wf, exact); + } + + return err; +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pwm_set_waveform_might_sleep); + static void pwm_apply_debug(struct pwm_device *pwm, const struct pwm_state *state) { -- cgit From 1afd01db1a76cdd1d96696e3790d66c79621784c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Uwe Kleine-König Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2024 10:58:00 +0200 Subject: pwm: Add tracing for waveform callbacks MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit This adds trace events for the recently introduced waveform callbacks. With the introduction of some helper macros consistency among the different events is ensured. Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1d71879b0de3bf01459c7a9d0f040d43eb5ace56.1726819463.git.u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König --- drivers/pwm/core.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) (limited to 'drivers/pwm/core.c') diff --git a/drivers/pwm/core.c b/drivers/pwm/core.c index 038f17dd2757..c3bdebf4cf6e 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/core.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/core.c @@ -164,30 +164,46 @@ static int __pwm_round_waveform_tohw(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *p const struct pwm_waveform *wf, void *wfhw) { const struct pwm_ops *ops = chip->ops; + int ret; + + ret = ops->round_waveform_tohw(chip, pwm, wf, wfhw); + trace_pwm_round_waveform_tohw(pwm, wf, wfhw, ret); - return ops->round_waveform_tohw(chip, pwm, wf, wfhw); + return ret; } static int __pwm_round_waveform_fromhw(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, const void *wfhw, struct pwm_waveform *wf) { const struct pwm_ops *ops = chip->ops; + int ret; + + ret = ops->round_waveform_fromhw(chip, pwm, wfhw, wf); + trace_pwm_round_waveform_fromhw(pwm, wfhw, wf, ret); - return ops->round_waveform_fromhw(chip, pwm, wfhw, wf); + return ret; } static int __pwm_read_waveform(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, void *wfhw) { const struct pwm_ops *ops = chip->ops; + int ret; + + ret = ops->read_waveform(chip, pwm, wfhw); + trace_pwm_read_waveform(pwm, wfhw, ret); - return ops->read_waveform(chip, pwm, wfhw); + return ret; } static int __pwm_write_waveform(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, const void *wfhw) { const struct pwm_ops *ops = chip->ops; + int ret; + + ret = ops->write_waveform(chip, pwm, wfhw); + trace_pwm_write_waveform(pwm, wfhw, ret); - return ops->write_waveform(chip, pwm, wfhw); + return ret; } #define WFHWSIZE 20 -- cgit From 65406de2b0d059d44472ad6f3f88a9b4a9894833 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Uwe Kleine-König Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2024 10:58:03 +0200 Subject: pwm: Reorder symbols in core.c MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit This moves pwm_get() and friends above the functions handling registration of pwmchips. The motivation is that character device support needs pwm_get() and pwm_put() and so ideally is defined below these and when a pwmchip is registered this registers the character device. So the natural order is pwm_get() and friend pwm character device symbols pwm_chip functions . The advantage of having these in their natural order is that static functions don't need to be forward declared. Note that the diff that git produces for this change some functions are moved down instead. This is technically equivalent, but not how this change was created. Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/193b3d933294da34e020650bff93b778de46b1c5.1726819463.git.u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König --- drivers/pwm/core.c | 312 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------------- 1 file changed, 156 insertions(+), 156 deletions(-) (limited to 'drivers/pwm/core.c') diff --git a/drivers/pwm/core.c b/drivers/pwm/core.c index c3bdebf4cf6e..634be56e204b 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/core.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/core.c @@ -1615,132 +1615,6 @@ static bool pwm_ops_check(const struct pwm_chip *chip) return true; } -/** - * __pwmchip_add() - register a new PWM chip - * @chip: the PWM chip to add - * @owner: reference to the module providing the chip. - * - * Register a new PWM chip. @owner is supposed to be THIS_MODULE, use the - * pwmchip_add wrapper to do this right. - * - * Returns: 0 on success or a negative error code on failure. - */ -int __pwmchip_add(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct module *owner) -{ - int ret; - - if (!chip || !pwmchip_parent(chip) || !chip->ops || !chip->npwm) - return -EINVAL; - - /* - * a struct pwm_chip must be allocated using (devm_)pwmchip_alloc, - * otherwise the embedded struct device might disappear too early - * resulting in memory corruption. - * Catch drivers that were not converted appropriately. - */ - if (!chip->uses_pwmchip_alloc) - return -EINVAL; - - if (!pwm_ops_check(chip)) - return -EINVAL; - - chip->owner = owner; - - if (chip->atomic) - spin_lock_init(&chip->atomic_lock); - else - mutex_init(&chip->nonatomic_lock); - - guard(mutex)(&pwm_lock); - - ret = idr_alloc(&pwm_chips, chip, 0, 0, GFP_KERNEL); - if (ret < 0) - return ret; - - chip->id = ret; - - dev_set_name(&chip->dev, "pwmchip%u", chip->id); - - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)) - of_pwmchip_add(chip); - - scoped_guard(pwmchip, chip) - chip->operational = true; - - ret = device_add(&chip->dev); - if (ret) - goto err_device_add; - - return 0; - -err_device_add: - scoped_guard(pwmchip, chip) - chip->operational = false; - - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)) - of_pwmchip_remove(chip); - - idr_remove(&pwm_chips, chip->id); - - return ret; -} -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__pwmchip_add); - -/** - * pwmchip_remove() - remove a PWM chip - * @chip: the PWM chip to remove - * - * Removes a PWM chip. - */ -void pwmchip_remove(struct pwm_chip *chip) -{ - pwmchip_sysfs_unexport(chip); - - scoped_guard(mutex, &pwm_lock) { - unsigned int i; - - scoped_guard(pwmchip, chip) - chip->operational = false; - - for (i = 0; i < chip->npwm; ++i) { - struct pwm_device *pwm = &chip->pwms[i]; - - if (test_and_clear_bit(PWMF_REQUESTED, &pwm->flags)) { - dev_warn(&chip->dev, "Freeing requested PWM #%u\n", i); - if (pwm->chip->ops->free) - pwm->chip->ops->free(pwm->chip, pwm); - } - } - - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)) - of_pwmchip_remove(chip); - - idr_remove(&pwm_chips, chip->id); - } - - device_del(&chip->dev); -} -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pwmchip_remove); - -static void devm_pwmchip_remove(void *data) -{ - struct pwm_chip *chip = data; - - pwmchip_remove(chip); -} - -int __devm_pwmchip_add(struct device *dev, struct pwm_chip *chip, struct module *owner) -{ - int ret; - - ret = __pwmchip_add(chip, owner); - if (ret) - return ret; - - return devm_add_action_or_reset(dev, devm_pwmchip_remove, chip); -} -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__devm_pwmchip_add); - static struct device_link *pwm_device_link_add(struct device *dev, struct pwm_device *pwm) { @@ -1918,36 +1792,6 @@ static struct pwm_device *acpi_pwm_get(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode) static DEFINE_MUTEX(pwm_lookup_lock); static LIST_HEAD(pwm_lookup_list); -/** - * pwm_add_table() - register PWM device consumers - * @table: array of consumers to register - * @num: number of consumers in table - */ -void pwm_add_table(struct pwm_lookup *table, size_t num) -{ - guard(mutex)(&pwm_lookup_lock); - - while (num--) { - list_add_tail(&table->list, &pwm_lookup_list); - table++; - } -} - -/** - * pwm_remove_table() - unregister PWM device consumers - * @table: array of consumers to unregister - * @num: number of consumers in table - */ -void pwm_remove_table(struct pwm_lookup *table, size_t num) -{ - guard(mutex)(&pwm_lookup_lock); - - while (num--) { - list_del(&table->list); - table++; - } -} - /** * pwm_get() - look up and request a PWM device * @dev: device for PWM consumer @@ -2174,6 +2018,162 @@ struct pwm_device *devm_fwnode_pwm_get(struct device *dev, } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(devm_fwnode_pwm_get); +/** + * __pwmchip_add() - register a new PWM chip + * @chip: the PWM chip to add + * @owner: reference to the module providing the chip. + * + * Register a new PWM chip. @owner is supposed to be THIS_MODULE, use the + * pwmchip_add wrapper to do this right. + * + * Returns: 0 on success or a negative error code on failure. + */ +int __pwmchip_add(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct module *owner) +{ + int ret; + + if (!chip || !pwmchip_parent(chip) || !chip->ops || !chip->npwm) + return -EINVAL; + + /* + * a struct pwm_chip must be allocated using (devm_)pwmchip_alloc, + * otherwise the embedded struct device might disappear too early + * resulting in memory corruption. + * Catch drivers that were not converted appropriately. + */ + if (!chip->uses_pwmchip_alloc) + return -EINVAL; + + if (!pwm_ops_check(chip)) + return -EINVAL; + + chip->owner = owner; + + if (chip->atomic) + spin_lock_init(&chip->atomic_lock); + else + mutex_init(&chip->nonatomic_lock); + + guard(mutex)(&pwm_lock); + + ret = idr_alloc(&pwm_chips, chip, 0, 0, GFP_KERNEL); + if (ret < 0) + return ret; + + chip->id = ret; + + dev_set_name(&chip->dev, "pwmchip%u", chip->id); + + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)) + of_pwmchip_add(chip); + + scoped_guard(pwmchip, chip) + chip->operational = true; + + ret = device_add(&chip->dev); + if (ret) + goto err_device_add; + + return 0; + +err_device_add: + scoped_guard(pwmchip, chip) + chip->operational = false; + + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)) + of_pwmchip_remove(chip); + + idr_remove(&pwm_chips, chip->id); + + return ret; +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__pwmchip_add); + +/** + * pwmchip_remove() - remove a PWM chip + * @chip: the PWM chip to remove + * + * Removes a PWM chip. + */ +void pwmchip_remove(struct pwm_chip *chip) +{ + pwmchip_sysfs_unexport(chip); + + scoped_guard(mutex, &pwm_lock) { + unsigned int i; + + scoped_guard(pwmchip, chip) + chip->operational = false; + + for (i = 0; i < chip->npwm; ++i) { + struct pwm_device *pwm = &chip->pwms[i]; + + if (test_and_clear_bit(PWMF_REQUESTED, &pwm->flags)) { + dev_warn(&chip->dev, "Freeing requested PWM #%u\n", i); + if (pwm->chip->ops->free) + pwm->chip->ops->free(pwm->chip, pwm); + } + } + + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)) + of_pwmchip_remove(chip); + + idr_remove(&pwm_chips, chip->id); + } + + device_del(&chip->dev); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pwmchip_remove); + +static void devm_pwmchip_remove(void *data) +{ + struct pwm_chip *chip = data; + + pwmchip_remove(chip); +} + +int __devm_pwmchip_add(struct device *dev, struct pwm_chip *chip, struct module *owner) +{ + int ret; + + ret = __pwmchip_add(chip, owner); + if (ret) + return ret; + + return devm_add_action_or_reset(dev, devm_pwmchip_remove, chip); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__devm_pwmchip_add); + +/** + * pwm_add_table() - register PWM device consumers + * @table: array of consumers to register + * @num: number of consumers in table + */ +void pwm_add_table(struct pwm_lookup *table, size_t num) +{ + guard(mutex)(&pwm_lookup_lock); + + while (num--) { + list_add_tail(&table->list, &pwm_lookup_list); + table++; + } +} + +/** + * pwm_remove_table() - unregister PWM device consumers + * @table: array of consumers to unregister + * @num: number of consumers in table + */ +void pwm_remove_table(struct pwm_lookup *table, size_t num) +{ + guard(mutex)(&pwm_lookup_lock); + + while (num--) { + list_del(&table->list); + table++; + } +} + static void pwm_dbg_show(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct seq_file *s) { unsigned int i; -- cgit From fdb62922ae89c17963f80abdd14b4d9f053bc962 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Andy Shevchenko Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2024 17:26:34 +0300 Subject: pwm: core: use device_match_name() instead of strcmp(dev_name(... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Use the dedicated helper for comparing device names against strings. Note, the current code has a check for the dev_name() against NULL. With the current implementations of the device_add() and dev_set_name() it most likely a theoretical assumption that that might happen, while I don't see how. Hence, that check has simply been removed. Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241025142704.405340-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König --- drivers/pwm/core.c | 4 +--- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) (limited to 'drivers/pwm/core.c') diff --git a/drivers/pwm/core.c b/drivers/pwm/core.c index 634be56e204b..4399e793efaf 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/core.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/core.c @@ -852,9 +852,7 @@ static struct pwm_chip *pwmchip_find_by_name(const char *name) guard(mutex)(&pwm_lock); idr_for_each_entry_ul(&pwm_chips, chip, tmp, id) { - const char *chip_name = dev_name(pwmchip_parent(chip)); - - if (chip_name && strcmp(chip_name, name) == 0) + if (device_match_name(pwmchip_parent(chip), name)) return chip; } -- cgit From 2ea25aab938a250bdf3148acd15359b56b91b40e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: David Lechner Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 16:18:49 -0500 Subject: pwm: core: export pwm_get_state_hw() MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Export the pwm_get_state_hw() function. This is useful in cases where we want to know what the hardware is actually doing, rather than what what we requested it should do. Locking had to be rearranged to ensure that the chip is still operational before trying to access ops now that this can be called from outside the pwm core. Signed-off-by: David Lechner Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241029-pwm-export-pwm_get_state_hw-v2-1-03ba063a3230@baylibre.com [ukleinek: Add dummy for !CONFIG_PWM] Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König --- drivers/pwm/core.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) (limited to 'drivers/pwm/core.c') diff --git a/drivers/pwm/core.c b/drivers/pwm/core.c index 4399e793efaf..ccbdd6dd1410 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/core.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/core.c @@ -718,40 +718,54 @@ int pwm_apply_atomic(struct pwm_device *pwm, const struct pwm_state *state) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pwm_apply_atomic); -static int pwm_get_state_hw(struct pwm_device *pwm, struct pwm_state *state) +/** + * pwm_get_state_hw() - get the current PWM state from hardware + * @pwm: PWM device + * @state: state to fill with the current PWM state + * + * Similar to pwm_get_state() but reads the current PWM state from hardware + * instead of the requested state. + * + * Returns: 0 on success or a negative error code on failure. + * Context: May sleep. + */ +int pwm_get_state_hw(struct pwm_device *pwm, struct pwm_state *state) { struct pwm_chip *chip = pwm->chip; const struct pwm_ops *ops = chip->ops; int ret = -EOPNOTSUPP; + might_sleep(); + + guard(pwmchip)(chip); + + if (!chip->operational) + return -ENODEV; + if (ops->read_waveform) { char wfhw[WFHWSIZE]; struct pwm_waveform wf; BUG_ON(WFHWSIZE < ops->sizeof_wfhw); - scoped_guard(pwmchip, chip) { + ret = __pwm_read_waveform(chip, pwm, &wfhw); + if (ret) + return ret; - ret = __pwm_read_waveform(chip, pwm, &wfhw); - if (ret) - return ret; - - ret = __pwm_round_waveform_fromhw(chip, pwm, &wfhw, &wf); - if (ret) - return ret; - } + ret = __pwm_round_waveform_fromhw(chip, pwm, &wfhw, &wf); + if (ret) + return ret; pwm_wf2state(&wf, state); } else if (ops->get_state) { - scoped_guard(pwmchip, chip) - ret = ops->get_state(chip, pwm, state); - + ret = ops->get_state(chip, pwm, state); trace_pwm_get(pwm, state, ret); } return ret; } +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pwm_get_state_hw); /** * pwm_adjust_config() - adjust the current PWM config to the PWM arguments -- cgit From b2eaa1170e45dc18eb09dcc9abafbe9a7502e960 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Uwe Kleine-König Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2024 16:35:22 +0100 Subject: pwm: Assume a disabled PWM to emit a constant inactive output MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Some PWM hardwares (e.g. MC33XS2410) cannot implement a zero duty cycle but can instead disable the hardware which also results in a constant inactive output. There are some checks (enabled with CONFIG_PWM_DEBUG) to help implementing a driver without violating the normal rounding rules. Make them less strict to let above described hardware pass without warning. Reported-by: Dimitri Fedrau Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241103205215.GA509903@debian Fixes: 3ad1f3a33286 ("pwm: Implement some checks for lowlevel drivers") Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König Reviewed-by: Dimitri Fedrau Tested-by: Dimitri Fedrau Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241105153521.1001864-2-u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König --- drivers/pwm/core.c | 10 +++++++--- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) (limited to 'drivers/pwm/core.c') diff --git a/drivers/pwm/core.c b/drivers/pwm/core.c index ccbdd6dd1410..9c733877e98e 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/core.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/core.c @@ -466,7 +466,7 @@ static void pwm_apply_debug(struct pwm_device *pwm, state->duty_cycle < state->period) dev_warn(pwmchip_parent(chip), ".apply ignored .polarity\n"); - if (state->enabled && + if (state->enabled && s2.enabled && last->polarity == state->polarity && last->period > s2.period && last->period <= state->period) @@ -474,7 +474,11 @@ static void pwm_apply_debug(struct pwm_device *pwm, ".apply didn't pick the best available period (requested: %llu, applied: %llu, possible: %llu)\n", state->period, s2.period, last->period); - if (state->enabled && state->period < s2.period) + /* + * Rounding period up is fine only if duty_cycle is 0 then, because a + * flat line doesn't have a characteristic period. + */ + if (state->enabled && s2.enabled && state->period < s2.period && s2.duty_cycle) dev_warn(pwmchip_parent(chip), ".apply is supposed to round down period (requested: %llu, applied: %llu)\n", state->period, s2.period); @@ -490,7 +494,7 @@ static void pwm_apply_debug(struct pwm_device *pwm, s2.duty_cycle, s2.period, last->duty_cycle, last->period); - if (state->enabled && state->duty_cycle < s2.duty_cycle) + if (state->enabled && s2.enabled && state->duty_cycle < s2.duty_cycle) dev_warn(pwmchip_parent(chip), ".apply is supposed to round down duty_cycle (requested: %llu/%llu, applied: %llu/%llu)\n", state->duty_cycle, state->period, -- cgit