linux-pwm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: Ilkka Koskinen <ilkka.koskinen@intel.com>,
	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Cc: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
	"linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] pwm: lpss: Do not set / wait_for update_bit when not enabled
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 11:46:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1488275185.20145.48.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170223080623.GB61837@kammari>

On Thu, 2017-02-23 at 00:06 -0800, Ilkka Koskinen wrote:

> > At least on cherrytrail, the update bit will never go low when the
> > enabled bit is not set.
> > 
> > This causes the backlight on my cube iwork8 air tablet to never go
> > on
> > again after being turned off, because the enable path does:
> > 
> > 	pwm_lpss_prepare();
> > 	ret = pwm_lpss_update(pwm);
> > 	if (ret)
> > 		return ret;
> > 	pwm_lpss_write(pwm, pwm_lpss_read(pwm) | PWM_ENABLE);
> > 
> > And the pwm_lpss_update() call fails, as the setting of the
> > UPDATE bit never gets acked, because the ENABLE bit is not set.
> > 
> > Subsequent calls then all fail because of the pwm_lpss_is_updating()
> > check done by pwm_lpss_apply().
> > 

> > This commit fixes this by setting the enable bit before calling
> > pwm_lpss_update().

This might break other systems.

> > @@ -137,12 +137,12 @@ static int pwm_lpss_apply(struct pwm_chip
> > *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
> >  				return ret;
> >  			}
> >  			pwm_lpss_prepare(lpwm, pwm, state-
> > >duty_cycle, state->period);
> > +			pwm_lpss_write(pwm, pwm_lpss_read(pwm) |
> > PWM_ENABLE);
> >  			ret = pwm_lpss_update(pwm);
> 
> The BXT documentation that I have recommends to set update bit before
> enable
> one.

We have the same work flow for all SoCs that have this PWM IP. I suspect
it might be a silicon bug somewhere, but I have never heard of it.

>  However, based on your experiment on Cherryview, we still have to set
> it
> before read_poll_timeout(). 

I would test and confirm the issue on our machines to see that the fix
doesn't break the rest. Seems like we have several subtle different
implementation of it: BYT, CHT, MRFLD, BXT.

> Andy, should we indeed remove the return value from apply() and just
> print a warning
> like Mika initially suggested?

I definitely consider it better than Hans' initial proposal.

Hans, can you just replace

 return ret;

by

 dev_warn(..., "UPDATE bit is not cleared!\n");

and test it?

-- 
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy

  reply	other threads:[~2017-02-28  9:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-02-20 20:16 [PATCH 1/3] pwm: lpss: Bug-fix + 2 improvements Hans de Goede
2017-02-20 20:16 ` [PATCH 1/3] pwm: lpss: Do not set / wait_for update_bit when not enabled Hans de Goede
2017-02-23  8:06   ` Ilkka Koskinen
2017-02-28  9:46     ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2017-03-13 15:29       ` Hans de Goede
2017-02-20 20:16 ` [PATCH 2/3] pwm: lpss: Simplify update check in pwm_lpss_apply Hans de Goede
2017-02-20 20:16 ` [PATCH 3/3] pwm: lpss: Add get_state callback Hans de Goede
2017-02-21 10:33   ` Andy Shevchenko
2017-02-27 14:09     ` Hans de Goede

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=1488275185.20145.48.camel@linux.intel.com \
    --to=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
    --cc=ilkka.koskinen@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
    /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).