* [PATCH v4 1/3] pwm: driver for qualcomm ipq6018 pwm block
@ 2021-06-27 5:24 Baruch Siach
2021-06-27 5:24 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] dt-bindings: pwm: add IPQ6018 binding Baruch Siach
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Baruch Siach @ 2021-06-27 5:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, Lee Jones
Cc: Baruch Siach, Andy Gross, Bjorn Andersson, Balaji Prakash J,
Rob Herring, Robert Marko, linux-pwm, devicetree, linux-arm-msm,
linux-arm-kernel
Driver for the PWM block in Qualcomm IPQ6018 line of SoCs. Based on
driver from downstream Codeaurora kernel tree. Removed support for older
(V1) variants because I have no access to that hardware.
Tested on IPQ6010 based hardware.
Signed-off-by: Baruch Siach <baruch@tkos.co.il>
---
v4:
Use div64_u64() to fix link for 32-bit targets ((kernel test robot
<lkp@intel.com>, Uwe Kleine-König)
v3:
s/qcom,pwm-ipq6018/qcom,ipq6018-pwm/ (Rob Herring)
Fix integer overflow on 32-bit targets (kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>)
v2:
Address Uwe Kleine-König review comments:
Fix period calculation when out of range
Don't set period larger than requested
Remove PWM disable on configuration change
Implement .apply instead of non-atomic .config/.enable/.disable
Don't modify PWM on .request/.free
Check pwm_div underflow
Fix various code and comment formatting issues
Other changes:
Use u64 divisor safe division
Remove now empty .request/.free
---
drivers/pwm/Kconfig | 12 +++
drivers/pwm/Makefile | 1 +
drivers/pwm/pwm-ipq.c | 238 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 251 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 drivers/pwm/pwm-ipq.c
diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
index c76adedd58c9..08add845596f 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
@@ -260,6 +260,18 @@ config PWM_INTEL_LGM
To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module
will be called pwm-intel-lgm.
+config PWM_IPQ
+ tristate "IPQ PWM support"
+ depends on ARCH_QCOM || COMPILE_TEST
+ depends on HAVE_CLK && HAS_IOMEM
+ help
+ Generic PWM framework driver for IPQ PWM block which supports
+ 4 pwm channels. Each of the these channels can be configured
+ independent of each other.
+
+ To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module
+ will be called pwm-ipq.
+
config PWM_IQS620A
tristate "Azoteq IQS620A PWM support"
depends on MFD_IQS62X || COMPILE_TEST
diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Makefile b/drivers/pwm/Makefile
index 708840b7fba8..7402feae4b36 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/pwm/Makefile
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_IMX1) += pwm-imx1.o
obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_IMX27) += pwm-imx27.o
obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_IMX_TPM) += pwm-imx-tpm.o
obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_INTEL_LGM) += pwm-intel-lgm.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_IPQ) += pwm-ipq.o
obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_IQS620A) += pwm-iqs620a.o
obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_JZ4740) += pwm-jz4740.o
obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_KEEMBAY) += pwm-keembay.o
diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-ipq.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-ipq.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..966b051573c8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-ipq.c
@@ -0,0 +1,238 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause OR GPL-2.0
+/*
+ * Copyright (c) 2016-2017, 2020 The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
+ */
+
+#include <linux/module.h>
+#include <linux/platform_device.h>
+#include <linux/pwm.h>
+#include <linux/clk.h>
+#include <linux/io.h>
+#include <linux/math64.h>
+#include <linux/of_device.h>
+
+#define CLK_SRC_FREQ (100*1000*1000)
+#define MAX_PWM_DEVICES 4
+
+/*
+ * Enable bit is set to enable output toggling in pwm device.
+ * Update bit is set to reflect the changed divider and high duration
+ * values in register.
+ */
+#define PWM_ENABLE 0x80000000
+#define PWM_UPDATE 0x40000000
+
+/* The frequency range supported is 1Hz to 100MHz */
+#define MIN_PERIOD_NS 10
+#define MAX_PERIOD_NS 1000000000
+
+/*
+ * The max value specified for each field is based on the number of bits
+ * in the pwm control register for that field
+ */
+#define MAX_PWM_CFG 0xFFFF
+
+#define PWM_CTRL_HI_SHIFT 16
+
+#define PWM_CFG_REG0 0 /*PWM_DIV PWM_HI*/
+#define PWM_CFG_REG1 1 /*ENABLE UPDATE PWM_PRE_DIV*/
+
+struct ipq_pwm_chip {
+ struct pwm_chip chip;
+ struct clk *clk;
+ void __iomem *mem;
+};
+
+static struct ipq_pwm_chip *to_ipq_pwm_chip(struct pwm_chip *chip)
+{
+ return container_of(chip, struct ipq_pwm_chip, chip);
+}
+
+static unsigned ipq_pwm_reg_offset(struct pwm_device *pwm, unsigned reg)
+{
+ return ((pwm->hwpwm * 2) + reg) * 4;
+}
+
+static void config_div_and_duty(struct pwm_device *pwm, int pre_div,
+ unsigned long long pwm_div, unsigned long period_ns,
+ unsigned long long duty_ns)
+{
+ unsigned long hi_dur;
+ unsigned long long quotient;
+ unsigned long val = 0;
+ struct ipq_pwm_chip *ipq_chip = to_ipq_pwm_chip(pwm->chip);
+
+ /*
+ * high duration = pwm duty * (pwm div + 1)
+ * pwm duty = duty_ns / period_ns
+ */
+ quotient = (pwm_div + 1) * duty_ns;
+ hi_dur = div64_u64(quotient, period_ns);
+
+ val |= ((hi_dur & MAX_PWM_CFG) << PWM_CTRL_HI_SHIFT);
+ val |= (pwm_div & MAX_PWM_CFG);
+ writel(val, ipq_chip->mem + ipq_pwm_reg_offset(pwm, PWM_CFG_REG0));
+ val = pre_div & MAX_PWM_CFG;
+ writel(val, ipq_chip->mem + ipq_pwm_reg_offset(pwm, PWM_CFG_REG1));
+}
+
+static int ipq_pwm_enable(struct pwm_device *pwm)
+{
+ struct ipq_pwm_chip *ipq_chip = to_ipq_pwm_chip(pwm->chip);
+ unsigned offset = ipq_pwm_reg_offset(pwm, PWM_CFG_REG1);
+ unsigned long val;
+
+ val = readl(ipq_chip->mem + offset);
+ val |= PWM_ENABLE | PWM_UPDATE;
+ writel(val, ipq_chip->mem + offset);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static void ipq_pwm_disable(struct pwm_device *pwm)
+{
+ struct ipq_pwm_chip *ipq_chip = to_ipq_pwm_chip(pwm->chip);
+ unsigned offset = ipq_pwm_reg_offset(pwm, PWM_CFG_REG1);
+ unsigned long val;
+
+ val = readl(ipq_chip->mem + offset);
+ val |= PWM_UPDATE;
+ val &= ~PWM_ENABLE;
+ writel(val, ipq_chip->mem + offset);
+}
+
+static int ipq_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
+ const struct pwm_state *state)
+{
+ struct ipq_pwm_chip *ipq_chip = to_ipq_pwm_chip(chip);
+ unsigned long freq;
+ int pre_div, close_pre_div, close_pwm_div;
+ int pwm_div;
+ long long diff;
+ unsigned long rate = clk_get_rate(ipq_chip->clk);
+ unsigned long min_diff = rate;
+ uint64_t fin_ps;
+ u64 period_ns, duty_ns;
+
+ if (state->period < MIN_PERIOD_NS)
+ return -ERANGE;
+
+ period_ns = min_t(u64, state->period, MAX_PERIOD_NS);
+ duty_ns = min_t(u64, state->duty_cycle, period_ns);
+
+ /* freq in Hz for period in nano second*/
+ freq = div64_u64(NSEC_PER_SEC, period_ns);
+ fin_ps = div64_u64(NSEC_PER_SEC * 1000ULL, rate);
+ close_pre_div = MAX_PWM_CFG;
+ close_pwm_div = MAX_PWM_CFG;
+
+ for (pre_div = 0; pre_div <= MAX_PWM_CFG; pre_div++) {
+ pwm_div = DIV64_U64_ROUND_CLOSEST(period_ns * 1000,
+ fin_ps * (pre_div + 1));
+ pwm_div--;
+ if (pwm_div < 0 || pwm_div > MAX_PWM_CFG)
+ continue;
+
+ diff = ((uint64_t)freq * (pre_div + 1) * (pwm_div + 1))
+ - (uint64_t)rate;
+
+ if (diff < 0) /* period larger than requested */
+ continue;
+ if (diff == 0) { /* bingo */
+ close_pre_div = pre_div;
+ close_pwm_div = pwm_div;
+ break;
+ }
+ if (diff < min_diff) {
+ min_diff = diff;
+ close_pre_div = pre_div;
+ close_pwm_div = pwm_div;
+ }
+ }
+
+ /* config divider values for the closest possible frequency */
+ config_div_and_duty(pwm, close_pre_div, close_pwm_div,
+ period_ns, duty_ns);
+ if (state->enabled)
+ ipq_pwm_enable(pwm);
+ else
+ ipq_pwm_disable(pwm);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static struct pwm_ops ipq_pwm_ops = {
+ .apply = ipq_pwm_apply,
+ .owner = THIS_MODULE,
+};
+
+static int ipq_pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+ struct ipq_pwm_chip *pwm;
+ struct device *dev;
+ int ret;
+
+ dev = &pdev->dev;
+ pwm = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*pwm), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!pwm)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ platform_set_drvdata(pdev, pwm);
+
+ pwm->mem = devm_platform_ioremap_resource(pdev, 0);
+ if (IS_ERR(pwm->mem))
+ return PTR_ERR(pwm->mem);
+
+ pwm->clk = devm_clk_get(dev, "core");
+ if (IS_ERR(pwm->clk))
+ return PTR_ERR(pwm->clk);
+
+ ret = clk_set_rate(pwm->clk, CLK_SRC_FREQ);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+ ret = clk_prepare_enable(pwm->clk);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ pwm->chip.dev = dev;
+ pwm->chip.ops = &ipq_pwm_ops;
+ pwm->chip.npwm = MAX_PWM_DEVICES;
+
+ ret = pwmchip_add(&pwm->chip);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "pwmchip_add() failed\n");
+ clk_disable_unprepare(pwm->clk);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int ipq_pwm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+ struct ipq_pwm_chip *pwm = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
+
+ pwmchip_remove(&pwm->chip);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static const struct of_device_id pwm_ipq_dt_match[] = {
+ { .compatible = "qcom,ipq6018-pwm", },
+ {}
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, pwm_ipq_dt_match);
+
+static struct platform_driver ipq_pwm_driver = {
+ .driver = {
+ .name = "ipq-pwm",
+ .owner = THIS_MODULE,
+ .of_match_table = pwm_ipq_dt_match,
+ },
+ .probe = ipq_pwm_probe,
+ .remove = ipq_pwm_remove,
+};
+
+module_platform_driver(ipq_pwm_driver);
+
+MODULE_LICENSE("Dual BSD/GPL");
--
2.30.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [PATCH v4 2/3] dt-bindings: pwm: add IPQ6018 binding 2021-06-27 5:24 [PATCH v4 1/3] pwm: driver for qualcomm ipq6018 pwm block Baruch Siach @ 2021-06-27 5:24 ` Baruch Siach 2021-06-27 5:24 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] arm64: dts: ipq6018: add pwm node Baruch Siach 2021-07-05 7:20 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] pwm: driver for qualcomm ipq6018 pwm block Uwe Kleine-König 2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Baruch Siach @ 2021-06-27 5:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, Lee Jones Cc: Baruch Siach, Andy Gross, Bjorn Andersson, Balaji Prakash J, Rob Herring, Robert Marko, linux-pwm, devicetree, linux-arm-msm, linux-arm-kernel DT binding for the PWM block in Qualcomm IPQ6018 SoC. Signed-off-by: Baruch Siach <baruch@tkos.co.il> --- v4: Update the binding example node as well (Rob Herring's bot) v3: s/qcom,pwm-ipq6018/qcom,ipq6018-pwm/ (Rob Herring) v2: Make #pwm-cells const (Rob Herring) --- .../devicetree/bindings/pwm/ipq-pwm.yaml | 52 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/ipq-pwm.yaml diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/ipq-pwm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/ipq-pwm.yaml new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..e02fd577cca5 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/ipq-pwm.yaml @@ -0,0 +1,52 @@ +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) +%YAML 1.2 +--- +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/pwm/ipq-pwm.yaml# +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# + +title: Qualcomm IPQ6018 PWM controller + +maintainers: + - Baruch Siach <baruch@tkos.co.il> + +properties: + "#pwm-cells": + const: 2 + + compatible: + const: qcom,ipq6018-pwm + + reg: + maxItems: 1 + + clocks: + maxItems: 1 + + clock-names: + const: core + +required: + - "#pwm-cells" + - compatible + - reg + - clocks + - clock-names + +additionalProperties: false + +examples: + - | + #include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,gcc-ipq6018.h> + + soc { + #address-cells = <2>; + #size-cells = <2>; + + pwm@1941010 { + #pwm-cells = <2>; + compatible = "qcom,ipq6018-pwm"; + reg = <0x0 0x1941010 0x0 0x20>; + clocks = <&gcc GCC_ADSS_PWM_CLK>; + clock-names = "core"; + }; + }; -- 2.30.2 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v4 3/3] arm64: dts: ipq6018: add pwm node 2021-06-27 5:24 [PATCH v4 1/3] pwm: driver for qualcomm ipq6018 pwm block Baruch Siach 2021-06-27 5:24 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] dt-bindings: pwm: add IPQ6018 binding Baruch Siach @ 2021-06-27 5:24 ` Baruch Siach 2021-07-05 7:20 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] pwm: driver for qualcomm ipq6018 pwm block Uwe Kleine-König 2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Baruch Siach @ 2021-06-27 5:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, Lee Jones Cc: Baruch Siach, Andy Gross, Bjorn Andersson, Balaji Prakash J, Rob Herring, Robert Marko, linux-pwm, devicetree, linux-arm-msm, linux-arm-kernel Describe the PWM block on IPQ6018. Signed-off-by: Baruch Siach <baruch@tkos.co.il> --- Rob has not responded to Bjorn's questions[1] regarding registers area description and the TCSR block. Leaving it the same as in v2 for now. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/YLgO0Aj1d4w9EcPv@yoga/ v3: s/qcom,pwm-ipq6018/qcom,ipq6018-pwm/ (Rob Herring) --- arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq6018.dtsi | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq6018.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq6018.dtsi index 6ee7b99c21ec..bbc1ed960bb4 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq6018.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq6018.dtsi @@ -355,6 +355,15 @@ i2c_1: i2c@78b7000 { /* BLSP1 QUP2 */ status = "disabled"; }; + pwm: pwm@1941010 { + #pwm-cells = <2>; + compatible = "qcom,ipq6018-pwm"; + reg = <0x0 0x1941010 0x0 0x20>; + clocks = <&gcc GCC_ADSS_PWM_CLK>; + clock-names = "core"; + status = "disabled"; + }; + qpic_bam: dma-controller@7984000 { compatible = "qcom,bam-v1.7.0"; reg = <0x0 0x07984000 0x0 0x1a000>; -- 2.30.2 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] pwm: driver for qualcomm ipq6018 pwm block 2021-06-27 5:24 [PATCH v4 1/3] pwm: driver for qualcomm ipq6018 pwm block Baruch Siach 2021-06-27 5:24 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] dt-bindings: pwm: add IPQ6018 binding Baruch Siach 2021-06-27 5:24 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] arm64: dts: ipq6018: add pwm node Baruch Siach @ 2021-07-05 7:20 ` Uwe Kleine-König 2021-07-07 4:58 ` Baruch Siach 2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Uwe Kleine-König @ 2021-07-05 7:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Baruch Siach Cc: Thierry Reding, Lee Jones, Andy Gross, Bjorn Andersson, Balaji Prakash J, Rob Herring, Robert Marko, linux-pwm, devicetree, linux-arm-msm, linux-arm-kernel [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 11816 bytes --] Hello Baruch, On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 08:24:04AM +0300, Baruch Siach wrote: > Driver for the PWM block in Qualcomm IPQ6018 line of SoCs. Based on > driver from downstream Codeaurora kernel tree. Removed support for older > (V1) variants because I have no access to that hardware. > > Tested on IPQ6010 based hardware. > > Signed-off-by: Baruch Siach <baruch@tkos.co.il> > --- > v4: > > Use div64_u64() to fix link for 32-bit targets ((kernel test robot > <lkp@intel.com>, Uwe Kleine-König) > > v3: > > s/qcom,pwm-ipq6018/qcom,ipq6018-pwm/ (Rob Herring) > > Fix integer overflow on 32-bit targets (kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>) > > v2: > > Address Uwe Kleine-König review comments: > > Fix period calculation when out of range > > Don't set period larger than requested > > Remove PWM disable on configuration change > > Implement .apply instead of non-atomic .config/.enable/.disable > > Don't modify PWM on .request/.free > > Check pwm_div underflow > > Fix various code and comment formatting issues > > Other changes: > > Use u64 divisor safe division > > Remove now empty .request/.free > --- > drivers/pwm/Kconfig | 12 +++ > drivers/pwm/Makefile | 1 + > drivers/pwm/pwm-ipq.c | 238 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 3 files changed, 251 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 drivers/pwm/pwm-ipq.c > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig > index c76adedd58c9..08add845596f 100644 > --- a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig > +++ b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig > @@ -260,6 +260,18 @@ config PWM_INTEL_LGM > To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module > will be called pwm-intel-lgm. > > +config PWM_IPQ > + tristate "IPQ PWM support" > + depends on ARCH_QCOM || COMPILE_TEST > + depends on HAVE_CLK && HAS_IOMEM > + help > + Generic PWM framework driver for IPQ PWM block which supports > + 4 pwm channels. Each of the these channels can be configured > + independent of each other. > + > + To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module > + will be called pwm-ipq. > + > config PWM_IQS620A > tristate "Azoteq IQS620A PWM support" > depends on MFD_IQS62X || COMPILE_TEST > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Makefile b/drivers/pwm/Makefile > index 708840b7fba8..7402feae4b36 100644 > --- a/drivers/pwm/Makefile > +++ b/drivers/pwm/Makefile > @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_IMX1) += pwm-imx1.o > obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_IMX27) += pwm-imx27.o > obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_IMX_TPM) += pwm-imx-tpm.o > obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_INTEL_LGM) += pwm-intel-lgm.o > +obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_IPQ) += pwm-ipq.o > obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_IQS620A) += pwm-iqs620a.o > obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_JZ4740) += pwm-jz4740.o > obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_KEEMBAY) += pwm-keembay.o > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-ipq.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-ipq.c > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..966b051573c8 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-ipq.c > @@ -0,0 +1,238 @@ > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause OR GPL-2.0 > +/* > + * Copyright (c) 2016-2017, 2020 The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved. > + */ > + > +#include <linux/module.h> > +#include <linux/platform_device.h> > +#include <linux/pwm.h> > +#include <linux/clk.h> > +#include <linux/io.h> > +#include <linux/math64.h> > +#include <linux/of_device.h> > + > +#define CLK_SRC_FREQ (100*1000*1000) > +#define MAX_PWM_DEVICES 4 MAX_PWM_DEVICES is only used once, in my book this doesn't need a define then. (But if you still want to keep it, that's fine for me, too.) > +/* > + * Enable bit is set to enable output toggling in pwm device. > + * Update bit is set to reflect the changed divider and high duration > + * values in register. > + */ > +#define PWM_ENABLE 0x80000000 > +#define PWM_UPDATE 0x40000000 > + > +/* The frequency range supported is 1Hz to 100MHz */ > +#define MIN_PERIOD_NS 10 > +#define MAX_PERIOD_NS 1000000000 Please use a driver prefix for these defines. > + > +/* > + * The max value specified for each field is based on the number of bits > + * in the pwm control register for that field > + */ > +#define MAX_PWM_CFG 0xFFFF > + > +#define PWM_CTRL_HI_SHIFT 16 > + > +#define PWM_CFG_REG0 0 /*PWM_DIV PWM_HI*/ > +#define PWM_CFG_REG1 1 /*ENABLE UPDATE PWM_PRE_DIV*/ > + > +struct ipq_pwm_chip { > + struct pwm_chip chip; > + struct clk *clk; > + void __iomem *mem; > +}; > + > +static struct ipq_pwm_chip *to_ipq_pwm_chip(struct pwm_chip *chip) > +{ > + return container_of(chip, struct ipq_pwm_chip, chip); > +} > + > +static unsigned ipq_pwm_reg_offset(struct pwm_device *pwm, unsigned reg) > +{ > + return ((pwm->hwpwm * 2) + reg) * 4; > +} > + > +static void config_div_and_duty(struct pwm_device *pwm, int pre_div, > + unsigned long long pwm_div, unsigned long period_ns, > + unsigned long long duty_ns) Please also use a consistent prefix for function names. I suggest to use u64 for some of the parameters. While this doesn't change anything, it is cleaner as the caller passes variables of this type. > +{ > + unsigned long hi_dur; > + unsigned long long quotient; > + unsigned long val = 0; > + struct ipq_pwm_chip *ipq_chip = to_ipq_pwm_chip(pwm->chip); > + > + /* > + * high duration = pwm duty * (pwm div + 1) > + * pwm duty = duty_ns / period_ns > + */ > + quotient = (pwm_div + 1) * duty_ns; > + hi_dur = div64_u64(quotient, period_ns); > + > + val |= ((hi_dur & MAX_PWM_CFG) << PWM_CTRL_HI_SHIFT); > + val |= (pwm_div & MAX_PWM_CFG); > + writel(val, ipq_chip->mem + ipq_pwm_reg_offset(pwm, PWM_CFG_REG0)); I consider it a bit irritating that the mask is called ...CFG but the shift define is called ..._CTRL_.... I suggest something like: #define IPQ_PWM_REG0 ... #define IPQ_PWM_REG0_HI 0xffff0000 #define IPQ_PWM_REG0_DIV 0x0000ffff ... val = FIELD_PREP(IPQ_PWM_REG0_HI, hi_dur) | FIELD_PREP(IPQ_PWM_REG0_DIV, pwm_div); ipq_pwm_writel(ipq_chip, val, PWM_CFG_REG0); > + val = pre_div & MAX_PWM_CFG; > + writel(val, ipq_chip->mem + ipq_pwm_reg_offset(pwm, PWM_CFG_REG1)); > +} > + > +static int ipq_pwm_enable(struct pwm_device *pwm) This is only called once. The caller (ipq_pwm_apply()) just before called config_div_and_duty() which already wrote PWM_CFG_REG1. If you unroll these calls you might fix a glitch or make it more unlikely. > +{ > + struct ipq_pwm_chip *ipq_chip = to_ipq_pwm_chip(pwm->chip); > + unsigned offset = ipq_pwm_reg_offset(pwm, PWM_CFG_REG1); > + unsigned long val; > + > + val = readl(ipq_chip->mem + offset); > + val |= PWM_ENABLE | PWM_UPDATE; > + writel(val, ipq_chip->mem + offset); > + > + return 0; > +} > + > +static void ipq_pwm_disable(struct pwm_device *pwm) > +{ > + struct ipq_pwm_chip *ipq_chip = to_ipq_pwm_chip(pwm->chip); > + unsigned offset = ipq_pwm_reg_offset(pwm, PWM_CFG_REG1); > + unsigned long val; > + > + val = readl(ipq_chip->mem + offset); > + val |= PWM_UPDATE; > + val &= ~PWM_ENABLE; > + writel(val, ipq_chip->mem + offset); > +} > + > +static int ipq_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, > + const struct pwm_state *state) > +{ > + struct ipq_pwm_chip *ipq_chip = to_ipq_pwm_chip(chip); > + unsigned long freq; > + int pre_div, close_pre_div, close_pwm_div; > + int pwm_div; > + long long diff; > + unsigned long rate = clk_get_rate(ipq_chip->clk); > + unsigned long min_diff = rate; > + uint64_t fin_ps; > + u64 period_ns, duty_ns; > + > + if (state->period < MIN_PERIOD_NS) > + return -ERANGE; MIN_PERIOD_NS depends on clk_get_rate(ipq_chip->clk), doesn't it? > + period_ns = min_t(u64, state->period, MAX_PERIOD_NS); > + duty_ns = min_t(u64, state->duty_cycle, period_ns); If you define MAX_PERIOD_NS as (u64)1000000000 you can just use min(). > + > + /* freq in Hz for period in nano second*/ Space before the closing */ please > + freq = div64_u64(NSEC_PER_SEC, period_ns); > + fin_ps = div64_u64(NSEC_PER_SEC * 1000ULL, rate); > + close_pre_div = MAX_PWM_CFG; > + close_pwm_div = MAX_PWM_CFG; > + > + for (pre_div = 0; pre_div <= MAX_PWM_CFG; pre_div++) { > + pwm_div = DIV64_U64_ROUND_CLOSEST(period_ns * 1000, > + fin_ps * (pre_div + 1)); > + pwm_div--; > + if (pwm_div < 0 || pwm_div > MAX_PWM_CFG) > + continue; > + > + diff = ((uint64_t)freq * (pre_div + 1) * (pwm_div + 1)) > + - (uint64_t)rate; > + > + if (diff < 0) /* period larger than requested */ > + continue; > + if (diff == 0) { /* bingo */ > + close_pre_div = pre_div; > + close_pwm_div = pwm_div; > + break; > + } > + if (diff < min_diff) { > + min_diff = diff; > + close_pre_div = pre_div; > + close_pwm_div = pwm_div; > + } I didn't check deeply, but I assume this calculation can be done more efficiently. Also I wonder if DIV64_U64_ROUND_CLOSEST is right. When you implement a .get_state() callback (which usually helps me to understand how the hardware works) I'm willing to take a closer look. > + } > + > + /* config divider values for the closest possible frequency */ > + config_div_and_duty(pwm, close_pre_div, close_pwm_div, > + period_ns, duty_ns); > + if (state->enabled) > + ipq_pwm_enable(pwm); > + else > + ipq_pwm_disable(pwm); > + > + return 0; > +} > + > +static struct pwm_ops ipq_pwm_ops = { > + .apply = ipq_pwm_apply, Please implement a .get_state() function. (And in general, test your patch with PWM_DEBUG enabled.) > + .owner = THIS_MODULE, > +}; > + > +static int ipq_pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > +{ > + struct ipq_pwm_chip *pwm; > + struct device *dev; > + int ret; > + > + dev = &pdev->dev; This can go to the line declaring dev. > + pwm = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*pwm), GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!pwm) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, pwm); > + > + pwm->mem = devm_platform_ioremap_resource(pdev, 0); > + if (IS_ERR(pwm->mem)) > + return PTR_ERR(pwm->mem); > + > + pwm->clk = devm_clk_get(dev, "core"); > + if (IS_ERR(pwm->clk)) Error message please. Preferably using dev_err_probe(). > + return PTR_ERR(pwm->clk); > + > + ret = clk_set_rate(pwm->clk, CLK_SRC_FREQ); > + if (ret) ditto. > + return ret; empty line here? > + ret = clk_prepare_enable(pwm->clk); > + if (ret) ditto. > + return ret; > + > + pwm->chip.dev = dev; > + pwm->chip.ops = &ipq_pwm_ops; > + pwm->chip.npwm = MAX_PWM_DEVICES; > + > + ret = pwmchip_add(&pwm->chip); > + if (ret < 0) { > + dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "pwmchip_add() failed\n"); > + clk_disable_unprepare(pwm->clk); > + return ret; > + } > + > + return 0; > +} > + > +static int ipq_pwm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > +{ > + struct ipq_pwm_chip *pwm = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); > + > + pwmchip_remove(&pwm->chip); clk_disable_unprepare missing here. > + > + return 0; > +} > + > +static const struct of_device_id pwm_ipq_dt_match[] = { > + { .compatible = "qcom,ipq6018-pwm", }, > + {} > +}; > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, pwm_ipq_dt_match); > + > +static struct platform_driver ipq_pwm_driver = { > + .driver = { > + .name = "ipq-pwm", > + .owner = THIS_MODULE, Setting owner isn't necessary any more since v3.11 (commit 9447057eaff8 ("platform_device: use a macro instead of platform_driver_register"). > + .of_match_table = pwm_ipq_dt_match, > + }, > + .probe = ipq_pwm_probe, > + .remove = ipq_pwm_remove, > +}; > + > +module_platform_driver(ipq_pwm_driver); > + > +MODULE_LICENSE("Dual BSD/GPL"); > -- > 2.30.2 > > -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ | [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] pwm: driver for qualcomm ipq6018 pwm block 2021-07-05 7:20 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] pwm: driver for qualcomm ipq6018 pwm block Uwe Kleine-König @ 2021-07-07 4:58 ` Baruch Siach 2021-07-07 5:42 ` Uwe Kleine-König 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Baruch Siach @ 2021-07-07 4:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Uwe Kleine-König Cc: Thierry Reding, Lee Jones, Andy Gross, Bjorn Andersson, Balaji Prakash J, Rob Herring, Robert Marko, linux-pwm, devicetree, linux-arm-msm, linux-arm-kernel Hi Uwe, Thanks for taking the time to review this patch. I have a few comment below. On Mon, Jul 05 2021, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 08:24:04AM +0300, Baruch Siach wrote: >> +/* >> + * Enable bit is set to enable output toggling in pwm device. >> + * Update bit is set to reflect the changed divider and high duration >> + * values in register. >> + */ >> +#define PWM_ENABLE 0x80000000 >> +#define PWM_UPDATE 0x40000000 >> + >> +/* The frequency range supported is 1Hz to 100MHz */ >> +#define MIN_PERIOD_NS 10 >> +#define MAX_PERIOD_NS 1000000000 > > Please use a driver prefix for these defines. I take this to refer also to the defines below, right? >> + >> +/* >> + * The max value specified for each field is based on the number of bits >> + * in the pwm control register for that field >> + */ >> +#define MAX_PWM_CFG 0xFFFF >> + >> +#define PWM_CTRL_HI_SHIFT 16 >> + >> +#define PWM_CFG_REG0 0 /*PWM_DIV PWM_HI*/ >> +#define PWM_CFG_REG1 1 /*ENABLE UPDATE PWM_PRE_DIV*/ ... >> +static void config_div_and_duty(struct pwm_device *pwm, int pre_div, >> + unsigned long long pwm_div, unsigned long period_ns, >> + unsigned long long duty_ns) > > Please also use a consistent prefix for function names. > > I suggest to use u64 for some of the parameters. While this doesn't > change anything, it is cleaner as the caller passes variables of this > type. Actually for pre_div and pwm_div the caller passes int values. I agree this is inconsistent. ... >> +static int ipq_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, >> + const struct pwm_state *state) >> +{ >> + struct ipq_pwm_chip *ipq_chip = to_ipq_pwm_chip(chip); >> + unsigned long freq; >> + int pre_div, close_pre_div, close_pwm_div; >> + int pwm_div; >> + long long diff; >> + unsigned long rate = clk_get_rate(ipq_chip->clk); >> + unsigned long min_diff = rate; >> + uint64_t fin_ps; >> + u64 period_ns, duty_ns; >> + >> + if (state->period < MIN_PERIOD_NS) >> + return -ERANGE; > > MIN_PERIOD_NS depends on clk_get_rate(ipq_chip->clk), doesn't it? probe sets this clock to the fixed 100MHz rate (CLK_SRC_FREQ). Would you prefer to derive MIN_PERIOD_NS from CLK_SRC_FREQ? >> + period_ns = min_t(u64, state->period, MAX_PERIOD_NS); >> + duty_ns = min_t(u64, state->duty_cycle, period_ns); > > If you define MAX_PERIOD_NS as (u64)1000000000 you can just use min(). > >> + >> + /* freq in Hz for period in nano second*/ > > Space before the closing */ please > >> + freq = div64_u64(NSEC_PER_SEC, period_ns); >> + fin_ps = div64_u64(NSEC_PER_SEC * 1000ULL, rate); >> + close_pre_div = MAX_PWM_CFG; >> + close_pwm_div = MAX_PWM_CFG; >> + >> + for (pre_div = 0; pre_div <= MAX_PWM_CFG; pre_div++) { >> + pwm_div = DIV64_U64_ROUND_CLOSEST(period_ns * 1000, >> + fin_ps * (pre_div + 1)); >> + pwm_div--; >> + if (pwm_div < 0 || pwm_div > MAX_PWM_CFG) >> + continue; >> + >> + diff = ((uint64_t)freq * (pre_div + 1) * (pwm_div + 1)) >> + - (uint64_t)rate; >> + >> + if (diff < 0) /* period larger than requested */ >> + continue; >> + if (diff == 0) { /* bingo */ >> + close_pre_div = pre_div; >> + close_pwm_div = pwm_div; >> + break; >> + } >> + if (diff < min_diff) { >> + min_diff = diff; >> + close_pre_div = pre_div; >> + close_pwm_div = pwm_div; >> + } > > I didn't check deeply, but I assume this calculation can be done more > efficiently. The thing is that we have two dividers to play with. I can't think of a cleaner way to find the best match for a given target frequency. > Also I wonder if DIV64_U64_ROUND_CLOSEST is right. When you implement > a .get_state() callback (which usually helps me to understand how the > hardware works) I'm willing to take a closer look. Thanks, baruch -- ~. .~ Tk Open Systems =}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{= - baruch@tkos.co.il - tel: +972.52.368.4656, http://www.tkos.co.il - ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] pwm: driver for qualcomm ipq6018 pwm block 2021-07-07 4:58 ` Baruch Siach @ 2021-07-07 5:42 ` Uwe Kleine-König 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Uwe Kleine-König @ 2021-07-07 5:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Baruch Siach Cc: Thierry Reding, Lee Jones, Andy Gross, Bjorn Andersson, Balaji Prakash J, Rob Herring, Robert Marko, linux-pwm, devicetree, linux-arm-msm, linux-arm-kernel [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4125 bytes --] Hello Baruch, On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 07:58:01AM +0300, Baruch Siach wrote: > On Mon, Jul 05 2021, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 08:24:04AM +0300, Baruch Siach wrote: > >> +/* > >> + * Enable bit is set to enable output toggling in pwm device. > >> + * Update bit is set to reflect the changed divider and high duration > >> + * values in register. > >> + */ > >> +#define PWM_ENABLE 0x80000000 > >> +#define PWM_UPDATE 0x40000000 > >> + > >> +/* The frequency range supported is 1Hz to 100MHz */ > >> +#define MIN_PERIOD_NS 10 > >> +#define MAX_PERIOD_NS 1000000000 > > > > Please use a driver prefix for these defines. > > I take this to refer also to the defines below, right? right. > >> + > >> +/* > >> + * The max value specified for each field is based on the number of bits > >> + * in the pwm control register for that field > >> + */ > >> +#define MAX_PWM_CFG 0xFFFF > >> + > >> +#define PWM_CTRL_HI_SHIFT 16 > >> + > >> +#define PWM_CFG_REG0 0 /*PWM_DIV PWM_HI*/ > >> +#define PWM_CFG_REG1 1 /*ENABLE UPDATE PWM_PRE_DIV*/ > > ... > > >> +static void config_div_and_duty(struct pwm_device *pwm, int pre_div, > >> + unsigned long long pwm_div, unsigned long period_ns, > >> + unsigned long long duty_ns) > > > > Please also use a consistent prefix for function names. > > > > I suggest to use u64 for some of the parameters. While this doesn't > > change anything, it is cleaner as the caller passes variables of this > > type. > > Actually for pre_div and pwm_div the caller passes int values. I agree > this is inconsistent. > > ... > > >> +static int ipq_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, > >> + const struct pwm_state *state) > >> +{ > >> + struct ipq_pwm_chip *ipq_chip = to_ipq_pwm_chip(chip); > >> + unsigned long freq; > >> + int pre_div, close_pre_div, close_pwm_div; > >> + int pwm_div; > >> + long long diff; > >> + unsigned long rate = clk_get_rate(ipq_chip->clk); > >> + unsigned long min_diff = rate; > >> + uint64_t fin_ps; > >> + u64 period_ns, duty_ns; > >> + > >> + if (state->period < MIN_PERIOD_NS) > >> + return -ERANGE; > > > > MIN_PERIOD_NS depends on clk_get_rate(ipq_chip->clk), doesn't it? > > probe sets this clock to the fixed 100MHz rate (CLK_SRC_FREQ). Would you > prefer to derive MIN_PERIOD_NS from CLK_SRC_FREQ? I'd like to either have all of ipq_pwm_apply use this information that the clock rate is 100MHz or nothing, but having MIN_PERIOD_NS hardcoding that information and use clk_get_rate(ipq_chip->clk) for calculating fin_ps is strange. > >> + freq = div64_u64(NSEC_PER_SEC, period_ns); > >> + fin_ps = div64_u64(NSEC_PER_SEC * 1000ULL, rate); > >> + close_pre_div = MAX_PWM_CFG; > >> + close_pwm_div = MAX_PWM_CFG; > >> + > >> + for (pre_div = 0; pre_div <= MAX_PWM_CFG; pre_div++) { > >> + pwm_div = DIV64_U64_ROUND_CLOSEST(period_ns * 1000, > >> + fin_ps * (pre_div + 1)); > >> + pwm_div--; > >> + if (pwm_div < 0 || pwm_div > MAX_PWM_CFG) > >> + continue; > >> + > >> + diff = ((uint64_t)freq * (pre_div + 1) * (pwm_div + 1)) > >> + - (uint64_t)rate; > >> + > >> + if (diff < 0) /* period larger than requested */ > >> + continue; > >> + if (diff == 0) { /* bingo */ > >> + close_pre_div = pre_div; > >> + close_pwm_div = pwm_div; > >> + break; > >> + } > >> + if (diff < min_diff) { > >> + min_diff = diff; > >> + close_pre_div = pre_div; > >> + close_pwm_div = pwm_div; > >> + } > > > > I didn't check deeply, but I assume this calculation can be done more > > efficiently. > > The thing is that we have two dividers to play with. I can't think of a > cleaner way to find the best match for a given target frequency. OK, with two equal dividers it might indeed be necessary to do it this way. After seeing a get_state implemententation I will think about this some more. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ | [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-07-07 5:42 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2021-06-27 5:24 [PATCH v4 1/3] pwm: driver for qualcomm ipq6018 pwm block Baruch Siach 2021-06-27 5:24 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] dt-bindings: pwm: add IPQ6018 binding Baruch Siach 2021-06-27 5:24 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] arm64: dts: ipq6018: add pwm node Baruch Siach 2021-07-05 7:20 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] pwm: driver for qualcomm ipq6018 pwm block Uwe Kleine-König 2021-07-07 4:58 ` Baruch Siach 2021-07-07 5:42 ` Uwe Kleine-König
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox