From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55511C00528 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2023 09:44:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232664AbjHCJov (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Aug 2023 05:44:51 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37158 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232926AbjHCJoc (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Aug 2023 05:44:32 -0400 Received: from esa.microchip.iphmx.com (esa.microchip.iphmx.com [68.232.154.123]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 725993595; Thu, 3 Aug 2023 02:44:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=microchip.com; i=@microchip.com; q=dns/txt; s=mchp; t=1691055871; x=1722591871; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=PM/FfZ0vfzEPppWtxflf4gMuWXsZGV2oeDBfvYpCndY=; b=LuaY9a+Ehwlj6i5zeYELFEW7oVwiIzCUvSz/hqfnYLT7ty0MuEE5m7zR 50X3A0bR6s76jtPjq2RgMMZdosVKkYjG+Gg3i8q9rZ5p4/g0ULwYeil+T anOZI3Anj01JcybqA6naMyoEPRDm4C+yP8Boh8iV4b6K8dmBD55pnhpNK XlAY+3vPisMO7fHhnym9yaRLUcn7H9roZuuopdMkCdDfF37v6DqyBDaiC wFK2ok750Pipgbt4Sk5ggyGfgcAAB28XY8xQqNaFAqxez34nQsEU+gWsi UVDW47VQnfVK0gJYVea0NgdvCBEhsJxFjO7nN+yKpEhNl5riDoC4JESlT Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.01,251,1684825200"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="227978460" X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN Received: from unknown (HELO email.microchip.com) ([170.129.1.10]) by esa2.microchip.iphmx.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA256; 03 Aug 2023 02:44:30 -0700 Received: from chn-vm-ex03.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.151) by chn-vm-ex03.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.21; Thu, 3 Aug 2023 02:44:05 -0700 Received: from wendy (10.10.115.15) by chn-vm-ex03.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.21 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 3 Aug 2023 02:44:03 -0700 Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2023 10:43:26 +0100 From: Conor Dooley To: Nylon Chen CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/1] Change PWM-controlled LED pin active mode and algorithm Message-ID: <20230803-caretaker-voicing-e982f2334067@wendy> References: <20230803085734.340-1-nylon.chen@sifive.com> <20230803-vehicular-leggings-2830239f818a@wendy> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="tzX8viRnXMQ13hWc" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230803-vehicular-leggings-2830239f818a@wendy> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org --tzX8viRnXMQ13hWc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hey Nylon, (I yoinked the reply to 1/1 to here, as it makes more sense in this context) > On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 10:15:10AM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 04:57:33PM +0800, Nylon Chen wrote: > > > According to the circuit diagram of User LEDs - RGB described in them= anual hifive-unleashed-a00.pdf[0] and hifive-unmatched-schematics-v3.pdf[1]. > > >=20 > > > The behavior of PWM is acitve-high. > > >=20 > > > Removed patches: 1 > > > New patches: (none) > > >=20 > > > Links: > > > - [0]: https://sifive.cdn.prismic.io/sifive/c52a8e32-05ce-4aaf-95c8-= 7bf8453f8698_hifive-unleashed-a00-schematics-1.pdf > > > - [1]: https://sifive.cdn.prismic.io/sifive/6a06d6c0-6e66-49b5-8e9e-= e68ce76f4192_hifive-unmatched-schematics-v3.pdf > > > - [2]: https://sifive.cdn.prismic.io/sifive/1a82e600-1f93-4f41-b2d8-= 86ed8b16acba_fu740-c000-manual-v1p6.pdf > > >=20 > > > Changed in v4: > > > - Remove previous updates to the PWM algorithm. > >=20 > > Why? I don't recall the conclusion on the previous version being that > > that patch was not needed. > > I apologize for forgetting about this update earlier. Just now, > I tried to pull rebase master and noticed that other developers seem > to have made some fixes to the algorithm. Upon closer inspection, I > found that they addressed the part we previously discussed with Emil > and Uwe, such as "first pwm_apply_state." >=20 > Therefore, my instinct tells me that they have already taken care of > the issues we discussed before. I didn't see anything in linux-next that would solve this problem of inversion. The last meaningful change is: commit 334c7b13d38321e47d1a51dba0bef9f4c403ec75 Author: Emil Renner Berthing AuthorDate: Wed Nov 9 12:37:24 2022 +0100 Commit: Thierry Reding CommitDate: Mon Jan 30 16:42:45 2023 +0100 =09 pwm: sifive: Always let the first pwm_apply_state succeed which predates your v3 by quite a bit. > I will review the conflicting parts in the pwm-sifive.c code in my v4 > version once again to ensure there are no omissions. If I find any, I > will submit v5 accordingly. And if this patch is okay in isolation, please reply here explaining which commit fixed the algorithm, so that I can pick it up. Thanks, Conor. --tzX8viRnXMQ13hWc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEABYIAB0WIQRh246EGq/8RLhDjO14tDGHoIJi0gUCZMt2vgAKCRB4tDGHoIJi 0o+tAP9T2YoYk//o5k7MVQwS/3aSXKAO4fwzn4VO7kYKb3jOPgD+KA7Bv5tRvwou PaimuCQYfr42wST7wH8mSiR9MZA7zQ4= =Sx/n -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --tzX8viRnXMQ13hWc--