All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paul Cercueil <paul@crapouillou.net>
To: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
Cc: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
	Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@gmail.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>,
	od@zcrc.me, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] backlight: pwm_bl: Set pin to sleep state when powered down
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 14:31:57 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1561386717.20436.0@crapouillou.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190624112844.fmwbfpdxjkst3u7r@holly.lan>



Le lun. 24 juin 2019 à 13:28, Daniel Thompson 
<daniel.thompson@linaro.org> a écrit :
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 03:56:08PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>  On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 01:41:45PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
>>  > On 22/05/2019 17:34, Paul Cercueil wrote:
>>  > > When the driver probes, the PWM pin is automatically configured 
>> to its
>>  > > default state, which should be the "pwm" function.
>>  >
>>  > At which point in the probe... and by who?
>> 
>>  The driver core will select the "default" state of a device right 
>> before
>>  calling the driver's probe, see:
>> 
>>  	drivers/base/pinctrl.c: pinctrl_bind_pins()
>> 
>>  which is called from:
>> 
>>  	drivers/base/dd.c: really_probe()
>> 
> 
> Thanks. I assumed it would be something like that... although given
> pwm-backlight is essentially a wrapper driver round a PWM I wondered 
> why
> the pinctrl was on the backlight node (rather than the PWM node).
> 
> Looking at the DTs in the upstream kernel it looks like ~20% of the
> backlight drivers have pinctrl on the backlight node. Others 
> presumable
> have none or have it on the PWM node (and it looks like support for
> sleeping the pins is *very* rare amoung the PWM drivers).

If your PWM driver has more than one channel and has the pinctrl node, 
you
cannot fine-tune the state of individual pins. They all share the same 
state.

>>  > > However, at this
>>  > > point we don't know the actual level of the pin, which may be 
>> active or
>>  > > inactive. As a result, if the driver probes without enabling the
>>  > > backlight, the PWM pin might be active, and the backlight would 
>> be
>>  > > lit way before being officially enabled.
>>  > >
>>  > > To work around this, if the probe function doesn't enable the 
>> backlight,
>>  > > the pin is set to its sleep state instead of the default one, 
>> until the
>>  > > backlight is enabled. Whenk the backlight is disabled, the pin 
>> is reset
>>  > > to its sleep state.
>>  > Doesn't this workaround result in a backlight flash between 
>> whatever enables
>>  > it and the new code turning it off again?
>> 
>>  Yeah, I think it would. I guess if you're very careful on how you 
>> set up
>>  the device tree you might be able to work around it. Besides the 
>> default
>>  and idle standard pinctrl states, there's also the "init" state. The
>>  core will select that instead of the default state if available. 
>> However
>>  there's also pinctrl_init_done() which will try again to switch to 
>> the
>>  default state after probe has finished and the driver didn't switch 
>> away
>>  from the init state.
>> 
>>  So you could presumably set up the device tree such that you have 
>> three
>>  states defined: "default" would be the one where the PWM pin is 
>> active,
>>  "idle" would be used when backlight is off (PWM pin inactive) and 
>> then
>>  another "init" state that would be the same as "idle" to be used 
>> during
>>  probe. During probe the driver could then switch to the "idle" 
>> state so
>>  that the pin shouldn't glitch.
>> 
>>  I'm not sure this would actually work because I think the way that
>>  pinctrl handles states both "init" and "idle" would be the same 
>> pointer
>>  values and therefore pinctrl_init_done() would think the driver 
>> didn't
>>  change away from the "init" state because it is the same pointer 
>> value
>>  as the "idle" state that the driver selected. One way to work around
>>  that would be to duplicate the "idle" state definition and 
>> associate one
>>  instance of it with the "idle" state and the other with the "init"
>>  state. At that point both states should be different (different 
>> pointer
>>  values) and we'd get the init state selected automatically before 
>> probe,
>>  select "idle" during probe and then the core will leave it alone. 
>> That's
>>  of course ugly because we duplicate the pinctrl state in DT, but 
>> perhaps
>>  it's the least ugly solution.
>>  Adding Linus for visibility. Perhaps he can share some insight.
> 
> To be honest I'm happy to summarize in my head as "if it flashes then 
> it's not
> a pwm_bl.c's problem" ;-).

It does not flash. But the backlight lits way too early, so we have a 
1-2 seconds
of "white screen" before the panel driver starts.

-Paul

> 
> Daniel.
> 
> 
>> 
>>  On that note, I'm wondering if perhaps it'd make sense for pinctrl 
>> to
>>  support some mode where a device would start out in idle mode. That 
>> is,
>>  where pinctrl_bind_pins() would select the "idle" mode as the 
>> default
>>  before probe. With something like that we could easily support this
>>  use-case without glitching.
>> 
>>  I suppose yet another variant would be for the PWM backlight to not 
>> use
>>  any of the standard pinctrl states at all. Instead it could just 
>> define
>>  custom states, say "active" and "inactive". Looking at the code that
>>  would prevent pinctrl_bind_pins() from doing anything with pinctrl
>>  states and given the driver exact control over when each of the 
>> states
>>  will be selected. That's somewhat suboptimal because we can't make 
>> use
>>  of the pinctrl PM helpers and it'd require more boilerplate.
>> 
>>  Thierry
>> 
>>  > > Signed-off-by: Paul Cercueil <paul@crapouillou.net> > ---
>>  > >   drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c | 9 +++++++++
>>  > >   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>  > >
>>  > > diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c 
>> b/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c
>>  > > index fb45f866b923..422f7903b382 100644
>>  > > --- a/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c
>>  > > +++ b/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c
>>  > > @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
>>  > >   #include <linux/module.h>
>>  > >   #include <linux/kernel.h>
>>  > >   #include <linux/init.h>
>>  > > +#include <linux/pinctrl/consumer.h>
>>  > >   #include <linux/platform_device.h>
>>  > >   #include <linux/fb.h>
>>  > >   #include <linux/backlight.h>
>>  > > @@ -50,6 +51,8 @@ static void pwm_backlight_power_on(struct 
>> pwm_bl_data *pb)
>>  > >   	struct pwm_state state;
>>  > >   	int err;
>>  > > +	pinctrl_pm_select_default_state(pb->dev);
>>  > > +
>>  > >   	pwm_get_state(pb->pwm, &state);
>>  > >   	if (pb->enabled)
>>  > >   		return;
>>  > > @@ -90,6 +93,8 @@ static void pwm_backlight_power_off(struct 
>> pwm_bl_data *pb)
>>  > >   	regulator_disable(pb->power_supply);
>>  > >   	pb->enabled = false;
>>  > > +
>>  > > +	pinctrl_pm_select_sleep_state(pb->dev);
>>  > >   }
>>  > >   static int compute_duty_cycle(struct pwm_bl_data *pb, int 
>> brightness)
>>  > > @@ -626,6 +631,10 @@ static int pwm_backlight_probe(struct 
>> platform_device *pdev)
>>  > >   	backlight_update_status(bl);
>>  > >   	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, bl);
>>  > > +
>>  > > +	if (bl->props.power == FB_BLANK_POWERDOWN)
>>  > > +		pinctrl_pm_select_sleep_state(&pdev->dev);
>>  >
>>  > Didn't backlight_update_status(bl) already do this?
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > Daniel.
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > > +
>>  > >   	return 0;
>>  > >   err_alloc:
>>  > >
>>  >
> 
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paul Cercueil <paul@crapouillou.net>
To: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
Cc: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
	Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@gmail.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>,
	od@zcrc.me, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] backlight: pwm_bl: Set pin to sleep state when powered down
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 16:31:57 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1561386717.20436.0@crapouillou.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190624112844.fmwbfpdxjkst3u7r@holly.lan>



Le lun. 24 juin 2019 à 13:28, Daniel Thompson 
<daniel.thompson@linaro.org> a écrit :
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 03:56:08PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>  On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 01:41:45PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
>>  > On 22/05/2019 17:34, Paul Cercueil wrote:
>>  > > When the driver probes, the PWM pin is automatically configured 
>> to its
>>  > > default state, which should be the "pwm" function.
>>  >
>>  > At which point in the probe... and by who?
>> 
>>  The driver core will select the "default" state of a device right 
>> before
>>  calling the driver's probe, see:
>> 
>>  	drivers/base/pinctrl.c: pinctrl_bind_pins()
>> 
>>  which is called from:
>> 
>>  	drivers/base/dd.c: really_probe()
>> 
> 
> Thanks. I assumed it would be something like that... although given
> pwm-backlight is essentially a wrapper driver round a PWM I wondered 
> why
> the pinctrl was on the backlight node (rather than the PWM node).
> 
> Looking at the DTs in the upstream kernel it looks like ~20% of the
> backlight drivers have pinctrl on the backlight node. Others 
> presumable
> have none or have it on the PWM node (and it looks like support for
> sleeping the pins is *very* rare amoung the PWM drivers).

If your PWM driver has more than one channel and has the pinctrl node, 
you
cannot fine-tune the state of individual pins. They all share the same 
state.

>>  > > However, at this
>>  > > point we don't know the actual level of the pin, which may be 
>> active or
>>  > > inactive. As a result, if the driver probes without enabling the
>>  > > backlight, the PWM pin might be active, and the backlight would 
>> be
>>  > > lit way before being officially enabled.
>>  > >
>>  > > To work around this, if the probe function doesn't enable the 
>> backlight,
>>  > > the pin is set to its sleep state instead of the default one, 
>> until the
>>  > > backlight is enabled. Whenk the backlight is disabled, the pin 
>> is reset
>>  > > to its sleep state.
>>  > Doesn't this workaround result in a backlight flash between 
>> whatever enables
>>  > it and the new code turning it off again?
>> 
>>  Yeah, I think it would. I guess if you're very careful on how you 
>> set up
>>  the device tree you might be able to work around it. Besides the 
>> default
>>  and idle standard pinctrl states, there's also the "init" state. The
>>  core will select that instead of the default state if available. 
>> However
>>  there's also pinctrl_init_done() which will try again to switch to 
>> the
>>  default state after probe has finished and the driver didn't switch 
>> away
>>  from the init state.
>> 
>>  So you could presumably set up the device tree such that you have 
>> three
>>  states defined: "default" would be the one where the PWM pin is 
>> active,
>>  "idle" would be used when backlight is off (PWM pin inactive) and 
>> then
>>  another "init" state that would be the same as "idle" to be used 
>> during
>>  probe. During probe the driver could then switch to the "idle" 
>> state so
>>  that the pin shouldn't glitch.
>> 
>>  I'm not sure this would actually work because I think the way that
>>  pinctrl handles states both "init" and "idle" would be the same 
>> pointer
>>  values and therefore pinctrl_init_done() would think the driver 
>> didn't
>>  change away from the "init" state because it is the same pointer 
>> value
>>  as the "idle" state that the driver selected. One way to work around
>>  that would be to duplicate the "idle" state definition and 
>> associate one
>>  instance of it with the "idle" state and the other with the "init"
>>  state. At that point both states should be different (different 
>> pointer
>>  values) and we'd get the init state selected automatically before 
>> probe,
>>  select "idle" during probe and then the core will leave it alone. 
>> That's
>>  of course ugly because we duplicate the pinctrl state in DT, but 
>> perhaps
>>  it's the least ugly solution.
>>  Adding Linus for visibility. Perhaps he can share some insight.
> 
> To be honest I'm happy to summarize in my head as "if it flashes then 
> it's not
> a pwm_bl.c's problem" ;-).

It does not flash. But the backlight lits way too early, so we have a 
1-2 seconds
of "white screen" before the panel driver starts.

-Paul

> 
> Daniel.
> 
> 
>> 
>>  On that note, I'm wondering if perhaps it'd make sense for pinctrl 
>> to
>>  support some mode where a device would start out in idle mode. That 
>> is,
>>  where pinctrl_bind_pins() would select the "idle" mode as the 
>> default
>>  before probe. With something like that we could easily support this
>>  use-case without glitching.
>> 
>>  I suppose yet another variant would be for the PWM backlight to not 
>> use
>>  any of the standard pinctrl states at all. Instead it could just 
>> define
>>  custom states, say "active" and "inactive". Looking at the code that
>>  would prevent pinctrl_bind_pins() from doing anything with pinctrl
>>  states and given the driver exact control over when each of the 
>> states
>>  will be selected. That's somewhat suboptimal because we can't make 
>> use
>>  of the pinctrl PM helpers and it'd require more boilerplate.
>> 
>>  Thierry
>> 
>>  > > Signed-off-by: Paul Cercueil <paul@crapouillou.net> > ---
>>  > >   drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c | 9 +++++++++
>>  > >   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>  > >
>>  > > diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c 
>> b/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c
>>  > > index fb45f866b923..422f7903b382 100644
>>  > > --- a/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c
>>  > > +++ b/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c
>>  > > @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
>>  > >   #include <linux/module.h>
>>  > >   #include <linux/kernel.h>
>>  > >   #include <linux/init.h>
>>  > > +#include <linux/pinctrl/consumer.h>
>>  > >   #include <linux/platform_device.h>
>>  > >   #include <linux/fb.h>
>>  > >   #include <linux/backlight.h>
>>  > > @@ -50,6 +51,8 @@ static void pwm_backlight_power_on(struct 
>> pwm_bl_data *pb)
>>  > >   	struct pwm_state state;
>>  > >   	int err;
>>  > > +	pinctrl_pm_select_default_state(pb->dev);
>>  > > +
>>  > >   	pwm_get_state(pb->pwm, &state);
>>  > >   	if (pb->enabled)
>>  > >   		return;
>>  > > @@ -90,6 +93,8 @@ static void pwm_backlight_power_off(struct 
>> pwm_bl_data *pb)
>>  > >   	regulator_disable(pb->power_supply);
>>  > >   	pb->enabled = false;
>>  > > +
>>  > > +	pinctrl_pm_select_sleep_state(pb->dev);
>>  > >   }
>>  > >   static int compute_duty_cycle(struct pwm_bl_data *pb, int 
>> brightness)
>>  > > @@ -626,6 +631,10 @@ static int pwm_backlight_probe(struct 
>> platform_device *pdev)
>>  > >   	backlight_update_status(bl);
>>  > >   	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, bl);
>>  > > +
>>  > > +	if (bl->props.power == FB_BLANK_POWERDOWN)
>>  > > +		pinctrl_pm_select_sleep_state(&pdev->dev);
>>  >
>>  > Didn't backlight_update_status(bl) already do this?
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > Daniel.
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > > +
>>  > >   	return 0;
>>  > >   err_alloc:
>>  > >
>>  >
> 
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2019-06-24 14:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-22 16:34 [PATCH] backlight: pwm_bl: Set pin to sleep state when powered down Paul Cercueil
2019-05-22 16:34 ` Paul Cercueil
2019-06-21 12:41 ` Daniel Thompson
2019-06-21 12:41   ` Daniel Thompson
2019-06-21 12:41   ` Daniel Thompson
2019-06-21 13:56   ` Thierry Reding
2019-06-21 13:56     ` Thierry Reding
2019-06-24 11:28     ` Daniel Thompson
2019-06-24 11:28       ` Daniel Thompson
2019-06-24 14:31       ` Paul Cercueil [this message]
2019-06-24 14:31         ` Paul Cercueil
2019-06-24 15:46         ` Daniel Thompson
2019-06-24 15:46           ` Daniel Thompson
2019-06-24 15:46           ` Daniel Thompson
2019-06-24 16:06           ` Paul Cercueil
2019-06-24 16:06             ` Paul Cercueil
2019-06-25  9:47         ` Thierry Reding
2019-06-25  9:47           ` Thierry Reding
2019-07-07  2:13           ` Paul Cercueil
2019-07-07  2:13             ` Paul Cercueil
2019-06-25  9:38       ` Thierry Reding
2019-06-25  9:38         ` Thierry Reding
2019-06-26  8:58         ` Uwe Kleine-König
2019-06-26  8:58           ` Uwe Kleine-König
2019-06-26  8:58           ` Uwe Kleine-König
2019-06-26  9:58           ` Thierry Reding
2019-06-26  9:58             ` Thierry Reding
2019-06-26 10:16             ` Uwe Kleine-König
2019-06-26 10:16               ` Uwe Kleine-König
2019-06-24 14:39     ` Paul Cercueil
2019-06-24 14:39       ` Paul Cercueil
2019-06-24 22:02     ` Linus Walleij
2019-06-24 22:02       ` Linus Walleij
2019-06-25  7:42 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2019-06-25  7:42   ` Uwe Kleine-König
2019-06-25  7:42   ` Uwe Kleine-König
2019-06-25  9:58   ` Thierry Reding
2019-06-25  9:58     ` Thierry Reding
2019-06-25  9:58     ` Thierry Reding
2019-06-25 19:19     ` Uwe Kleine-König
2019-06-25 19:19       ` Uwe Kleine-König
2019-06-25 19:19       ` Uwe Kleine-König

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1561386717.20436.0@crapouillou.net \
    --to=paul@crapouillou.net \
    --cc=b.zolnierkie@samsung.com \
    --cc=daniel.thompson@linaro.org \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=jingoohan1@gmail.com \
    --cc=lee.jones@linaro.org \
    --cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=od@zcrc.me \
    --cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.