All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
To: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@microchip.com>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@microchip.com>,
	Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
	Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@microchip.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel@pengutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] pwm: atmel: Improve duty cycle calculation in .apply()
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2021 19:07:32 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YIL+1APYTqWSKRIc@orome.fritz.box> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210420095118.1571344-2-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1282 bytes --]

On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 11:51:18AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> In the calculation of the register value determining the duty cycle the
> requested period is used instead of the actually implemented period which
> results in suboptimal settings.
> 
> The following example assumes an input clock of 133333333 Hz on one of
> the SoCs with 16 bit period.
> 
> When the following state is to be applied:
> 
>         .period = 414727681
>         .duty_cycle = 652806
> 
> the following register values used to be  calculated:
> 
>         PRES = 10
>         CPRD = 54000
>         CDTY = 53916
> 
> which yields an actual duty cycle of a bit more than 645120 ns.
> 
> The setting
> 
>         PRES = 10
>         CPRD = 54000
>         CDTY = 53915
> 
> however yields a duty of 652800 ns which is between the current result
> and the requested value and so is a better approximation.
> 
> The reason for this error is that for the calculation of CDTY the
> requested period was used instead of the actually implemented one.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
> ---
>  drivers/pwm/pwm-atmel.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

Applied, thanks.

Thierry

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
To: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org,
	Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
	Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@microchip.com>,
	kernel@pengutronix.de, Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
	Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@microchip.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] pwm: atmel: Improve duty cycle calculation in .apply()
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2021 19:07:32 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YIL+1APYTqWSKRIc@orome.fritz.box> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210420095118.1571344-2-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1282 bytes --]

On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 11:51:18AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> In the calculation of the register value determining the duty cycle the
> requested period is used instead of the actually implemented period which
> results in suboptimal settings.
> 
> The following example assumes an input clock of 133333333 Hz on one of
> the SoCs with 16 bit period.
> 
> When the following state is to be applied:
> 
>         .period = 414727681
>         .duty_cycle = 652806
> 
> the following register values used to be  calculated:
> 
>         PRES = 10
>         CPRD = 54000
>         CDTY = 53916
> 
> which yields an actual duty cycle of a bit more than 645120 ns.
> 
> The setting
> 
>         PRES = 10
>         CPRD = 54000
>         CDTY = 53915
> 
> however yields a duty of 652800 ns which is between the current result
> and the requested value and so is a better approximation.
> 
> The reason for this error is that for the calculation of CDTY the
> requested period was used instead of the actually implemented one.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
> ---
>  drivers/pwm/pwm-atmel.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

Applied, thanks.

Thierry

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 176 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2021-04-23 17:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-20  9:51 [PATCH 1/2] pwm: atmel: Fix duty cycle calculation in .get_state() Uwe Kleine-König
2021-04-20  9:51 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2021-04-20  9:51 ` [PATCH 2/2] pwm: atmel: Improve duty cycle calculation in .apply() Uwe Kleine-König
2021-04-20  9:51   ` Uwe Kleine-König
2021-04-23 17:07   ` Thierry Reding [this message]
2021-04-23 17:07     ` Thierry Reding
2021-04-21  9:26 ` [PATCH] pwm: atmel: rework tracking updates pending in hardware Uwe Kleine-König
2021-04-21  9:26   ` Uwe Kleine-König
2021-04-21 11:03   ` overflow and wrong timeout errors in pwm-atmel Uwe Kleine-König
2021-04-21 13:48     ` Uwe Kleine-König
2021-04-21 13:48       ` Uwe Kleine-König
2021-04-21 14:18       ` Alexandre Belloni
2021-04-21 14:18         ` Alexandre Belloni
2021-04-21 15:26         ` Uwe Kleine-König
2021-04-21 15:26           ` Uwe Kleine-König
2021-07-05  7:55   ` [PATCH] pwm: atmel: rework tracking updates pending in hardware Uwe Kleine-König
2021-07-05  7:55     ` Uwe Kleine-König
2021-04-23 17:07 ` [PATCH 1/2] pwm: atmel: Fix duty cycle calculation in .get_state() Thierry Reding
2021-04-23 17:07   ` Thierry Reding

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=YIL+1APYTqWSKRIc@orome.fritz.box \
    --to=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
    --cc=alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com \
    --cc=claudiu.beznea@microchip.com \
    --cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=lee.jones@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ludovic.desroches@microchip.com \
    --cc=nicolas.ferre@microchip.com \
    --cc=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
    /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.