From: Nicolas Frattaroli <nicolas.frattaroli@collabora.com>
To: "Uwe Kleine-König" <ukleinek@kernel.org>,
"Rob Herring" <robh@kernel.org>,
"Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
"Conor Dooley" <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
"Heiko Stuebner" <heiko@sntech.de>, "Lee Jones" <lee@kernel.org>,
"William Breathitt Gray" <wbg@kernel.org>,
"Johan Jonker" <jbx6244@yandex.com>
Cc: kernel@collabora.com, Jonas Karlman <jonas@kwiboo.se>,
Alexey Charkov <alchark@gmail.com>,
linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] mfd: Add Rockchip mfpwm driver
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2025 13:20:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3598089.ElGaqSPkdT@workhorse> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <16341fe2-7d2b-45a6-a861-93950c1bbd1f@yandex.com>
On Tuesday, 28 October 2025 19:52:53 Central European Standard Time Johan Jonker wrote:
>
> On 10/27/25 18:11, Nicolas Frattaroli wrote:
> > With the Rockchip RK3576, the PWM IP used by Rockchip has changed
> > substantially. Looking at both the downstream pwm-rockchip driver as
> > well as the mainline pwm-rockchip driver made it clear that with all its
> > additional features and its differences from previous IP revisions, it
> > is best supported in a new driver.
> >
> > This brings us to the question as to what such a new driver should be.
> > To me, it soon became clear that it should actually be several new
> > drivers, most prominently when Uwe Kleine-König let me know that I
> > should not implement the pwm subsystem's capture callback, but instead
> > write a counter driver for this functionality.
> >
> > Combined with the other as-of-yet unimplemented functionality of this
> > new IP, it became apparent that it needs to be spread across several
> > subsystems.
> >
> > For this reason, we add a new MFD core driver, called mfpwm (short for
> > "Multi-function PWM"). This "parent" driver makes sure that only one
> > device function driver is using the device at a time, and is in charge
> > of registering the MFD cell devices for the individual device functions
> > offered by the device.
> >
> > An acquire/release pattern is used to guarantee that device function
> > drivers don't step on each other's toes.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Frattaroli <nicolas.frattaroli@collabora.com>
> > ---
> > MAINTAINERS | 2 +
> > drivers/mfd/Kconfig | 15 ++
> > drivers/mfd/Makefile | 1 +
> > drivers/mfd/rockchip-mfpwm.c | 340 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > include/linux/mfd/rockchip-mfpwm.h | 454 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 5 files changed, 812 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> > index baecabab35a2..8f3235ba825e 100644
> > --- a/MAINTAINERS
> > +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> > @@ -22372,6 +22372,8 @@ L: linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
> > L: linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org
> > S: Maintained
>
> > F: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/rockchip,rk3576-pwm.yaml
>
> A question not so much for Nicolas specific:
> The yaml documents already have a 'maintainers' entry.
> However MAINTAINERS is full yaml entries.
> Could someone explain why we still need dual registration?
>
> maintainers:
> - Nicolas Frattaroli <nicolas.frattaroli@collabora.com>
>
> > +F: drivers/soc/rockchip/mfpwm.c
> > +F: include/soc/rockchip/mfpwm.h
>
> different file name and location?
>
> drivers/mfd/rockchip-mfpwm.c | 340 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/mfd/rockchip-mfpwm.h | 454 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
Yeah, I forgot to adjust this when moving this to being an MFD.
I'll fix it in v4.
> > [... snip ...]
> > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/rockchip-mfpwm.c b/drivers/mfd/rockchip-mfpwm.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..08c2d8da41b7
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/mfd/rockchip-mfpwm.c
> > [... snip ...]
> > +
> > +static int mfpwm_register_subdevs(struct rockchip_mfpwm *mfpwm)
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > +
>
> > + ret = mfpwm_register_subdev(mfpwm, "pwm-rockchip-v4");
>
> Not sure who came up with this name?
I did.
> In case we need to filter wouldn't be easier to order it just like the bindings: manufacture '-' function
It's based on the filename of the pwm output driver. pwm-rockchip.c
is already taken by v1 to v3 hardware. Apparently however, pwm
subsystem drivers then reverse the order in the driver name, so
`pwm-rockchip.c` registers a driver with the name `rockchip-pwm`.
So I'll rename my PWM output driver to `rockchip-pwm-v4`. The v4
stays, it refers to the hardware IP revision.
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + ret = mfpwm_register_subdev(mfpwm, "rockchip-pwm-capture");
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > [... snip ...]
Kind regards,
Nicolas Frattaroli
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-31 12:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-27 17:11 [PATCH v3 0/5] Add Rockchip RK3576 PWM Support Through MFPWM Nicolas Frattaroli
2025-10-27 17:11 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] dt-bindings: pwm: Add a new binding for rockchip,rk3576-pwm Nicolas Frattaroli
2025-10-28 3:06 ` Damon Ding
2025-10-28 8:50 ` Conor Dooley
2025-10-28 10:42 ` Damon Ding
2025-10-27 17:11 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] mfd: Add Rockchip mfpwm driver Nicolas Frattaroli
2025-10-28 18:52 ` Johan Jonker
2025-10-31 12:20 ` Nicolas Frattaroli [this message]
2025-11-03 15:25 ` Lee Jones
2025-10-27 17:11 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] pwm: Add rockchip PWMv4 driver Nicolas Frattaroli
2025-10-28 8:16 ` Damon Ding
2025-11-14 9:51 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2025-11-14 10:13 ` Nicolas Frattaroli
2025-11-14 10:41 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2025-10-27 17:11 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] counter: Add rockchip-pwm-capture driver Nicolas Frattaroli
2025-10-28 11:05 ` Damon Ding
2025-10-27 17:12 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] arm64: dts: rockchip: add PWM nodes to RK3576 SoC dtsi Nicolas Frattaroli
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=3598089.ElGaqSPkdT@workhorse \
--to=nicolas.frattaroli@collabora.com \
--cc=alchark@gmail.com \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=heiko@sntech.de \
--cc=jbx6244@yandex.com \
--cc=jonas@kwiboo.se \
--cc=kernel@collabora.com \
--cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=lee@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=ukleinek@kernel.org \
--cc=wbg@kernel.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).