linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com (Boris Brezillon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] pwm: rockchip: State of pwm clock should synchronize with pwm enabled state
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 08:55:44 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170228085544.1b3d7283@bbrezillon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1488264216-9361-1-git-send-email-david.wu@rock-chips.com>

Hi David,

On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 14:43:36 +0800
David Wu <david.wu@rock-chips.com> wrote:

> From: "david.wu" <david.wu@rock-chips.com>
> 
> If the pwm was not enabled at uboot loader, pwm could not work for clock
> always disabled at pwm driver. The pwm clock is enabled at beginning of
> pwm_apply(), but disabled at end of pwm_apply().
> 
> If the pwm was enabled at uboot loader, pwm clock is always enabled unless
> closed by ATF. The pwm-backlight might turn off the power at early suspend,
> should disable pwm clock for saving power consume.
> 
> It is important to provide opportunity to enable/disable clock at pwm driver,
> the pwm consumer should ensure correct order to call pwm enable/disable, and
> pwm driver ensure state of pwm clock synchronized with pwm enabled state.

Oops. It seems I'm the one who introduced this regression when moving
to the atomic PWM API.

You should add

Fixes: 2bf1c98aa5a4 ("pwm: rockchip: Add support for atomic update")
Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org

> 
> Signed-off-by: David Wu <david.wu@rock-chips.com>
> ---
>  drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c
> index ef89df1..14a0445 100644
> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c
> @@ -191,6 +191,26 @@ static int rockchip_pwm_config(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +static int rk_pwm_enable(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
> +			 bool enable, enum pwm_polarity polarity)

Please stay consistent with the existing naming scheme:

static int rockchip_pwm_enable(struct pwm_chip *chip,
			       struct pwm_device *pwm,
			       bool enable,
			       enum pwm_polarity polarity)

Once fixed, you can add

Reviewed-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>

> +{
> +	struct rockchip_pwm_chip *pc = to_rockchip_pwm_chip(chip);
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	if (enable) {
> +		ret = clk_enable(pc->clk);
> +		if (ret)
> +			return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	pc->data->set_enable(chip, pwm, enable, polarity);
> +
> +	if (!enable)
> +		clk_disable(pc->clk);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>  static int rockchip_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
>  			      struct pwm_state *state)
>  {
> @@ -207,22 +227,26 @@ static int rockchip_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
>  		return ret;
>  
>  	if (state->polarity != curstate.polarity && enabled) {
> -		pc->data->set_enable(chip, pwm, false, state->polarity);
> +		ret = rk_pwm_enable(chip, pwm, false, state->polarity);
> +		if (ret)
> +			goto out;
>  		enabled = false;
>  	}
>  
>  	ret = rockchip_pwm_config(chip, pwm, state->duty_cycle, state->period);
>  	if (ret) {
>  		if (enabled != curstate.enabled)
> -			pc->data->set_enable(chip, pwm, !enabled,
> -					     state->polarity);
> -
> +			rk_pwm_enable(chip, pwm, !enabled,
> +				      state->polarity);
>  		goto out;
>  	}
>  
> -	if (state->enabled != enabled)
> -		pc->data->set_enable(chip, pwm, state->enabled,
> -				     state->polarity);
> +	if (state->enabled != enabled) {
> +		ret = rk_pwm_enable(chip, pwm, state->enabled,
> +				    state->polarity);
> +		if (ret)
> +			goto out;
> +	}
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Update the state with the real hardware, which can differ a bit

      reply	other threads:[~2017-02-28  7:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-02-28  6:43 [PATCH] pwm: rockchip: State of pwm clock should synchronize with pwm enabled state David Wu
2017-02-28  7:55 ` Boris Brezillon [this message]

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=20170228085544.1b3d7283@bbrezillon \
    --to=boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).