From: "Uwe Kleine-König" <ukleinek@kernel.org>
To: Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca <luizluca@gmail.com>
Cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
Chris Packham <chris.packham@alliedtelesis.co.nz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@us.ibm.com>,
linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [hwmon-next PATCH v4 3/4] hwmon: (adt7470) Expose fan control via PWM framework
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 23:34:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ampxIhULPHehuh-W@monoceros> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJq09z5diKf9HpJ0B_7tyo2-2wPfojyG4pRY1qhRQ3fzx0Gr4A@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1963 bytes --]
Hello Luiz,
On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 04:05:56PM -0300, Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca wrote:
> > Here the right thing is (untested):
> >
> > if (!wf->period_length_ns) {
> > wfhw->val = 0;
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > actual_period = NSEC_PER_SEC / data->pwm_freq;
> >
> > if (wf->duty_length_ns >= actual_period)
> > val = ADT7470_PWM_MAX;
> > else
> > val = mul_u64_u64_div_u64(wf->duty_length_ns, ADT7470_PWM_MAX, actual_period);
> >
> > return (actual_period < wf->period_length_ns) ? 0 : 1;
>
> Uwe, thank you for the waveform callbacks snippet. It was much
> cleaner. I only had to make one small mathematical adjustment to the
> actual_period calculation in tohw() to satisfy CONFIG_PWM_DEBUG.
>
> When using a truncating division (NSEC_PER_SEC / data->pwm_freq), it
> triggered a "Wrong rounding" error during testing:
>
> pwm pwmchip0: Wrong rounding: requested 714285/714286 [+0], result
> 714286/714286 [+0]
>
> For example, at 1400 Hz, the truncating division gives an
> actual_period of 714285 ns. If the framework requests a duty cycle of
> 714285 ns and a period of 714286 ns, the evaluation (714285 * 255) /
> 714285 yields a register value of 255. When read back in fromhw()
> (which correctly rounds the period up to 714286 ns), the resulting
> duty cycle becomes 714286 ns. Since 714286 > 714285, CONFIG_PWM_DEBUG
> rightfully complains about the duty cycle inflation.
>
> To ensure the calculated register value is strictly rounded down, I
> changed the actual_period denominator in tohw() to use
> DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(NSEC_PER_SEC, data->pwm_freq). Maximizing the
> denominator guarantees the resulting duty cycle fraction never
> inflates, effectively passing all strict debug checks.
right, for the calculation of actual_period an uprounding division must
be used.
Best regards
Uwe
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-29 21:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-29 4:46 [hwmon-next PATCH v4 0/4] hwmon: (adt7470) Add PWM provider and thermal sensor support Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca
2026-07-29 4:46 ` [hwmon-next PATCH v4 1/4] dt-bindings: hwmon: add adi,adt7470 Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca
2026-07-29 4:49 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-29 4:46 ` [hwmon-next PATCH v4 2/4] hwmon: (adt7470) Add ADT7470_PWM_MAX macro Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca
2026-07-29 4:51 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-29 4:46 ` [hwmon-next PATCH v4 3/4] hwmon: (adt7470) Expose fan control via PWM framework Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca
2026-07-29 5:00 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-29 5:56 ` Guenter Roeck
2026-07-29 11:49 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2026-07-29 14:22 ` Guenter Roeck
2026-07-29 19:05 ` Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca
2026-07-29 20:23 ` Guenter Roeck
2026-07-29 21:34 ` Uwe Kleine-König [this message]
2026-07-29 11:47 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2026-07-29 4:46 ` [hwmon-next PATCH v4 4/4] hwmon: (adt7470) Add thermal zone sensor support Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca
2026-07-29 5:03 ` sashiko-bot
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=ampxIhULPHehuh-W@monoceros \
--to=ukleinek@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris.packham@alliedtelesis.co.nz \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=djwong@us.ibm.com \
--cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=luizluca@gmail.com \
--cc=robh@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