Linux PWM subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
To: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@renesas.com>,
	thierry.reding@gmail.com, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: pwm: rcar: improve calculation of divider
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2018 22:55:00 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1828832.OCLkmioh6N@avalon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181207214932.xckuuarcka733v7y@pengutronix.de>

Hi Uwe,

On Friday, 7 December 2018 23:49:32 EET Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> while looking at the driver I noticed another patch opportunity: In
> rcar_pwm_get_clock_division() there is a loop:
> 
> 	for (div = 0; div <= RCAR_PWM_MAX_DIVISION; div++) {
> 		max = (unsigned long long)NSEC_PER_SEC * RCAR_PWM_MAX_CYCLE *
> 			(1 << div);
> 		do_div(max, clk_rate);
> 		if (period_ns <= max)
> 			break;
> 	}
> 
> The value of div should be calculatable without a loop. Something like:
> 
>    divider = NSEC_PER_SEC * RCAR_PWM_MAX_CYCLE;
>    tmp = (unsigned long long)period_ns * clk_rate + (divider - 1);
>    do_div(tmp, divider);
>    div = ilog2(tmp - 1) + 1;
> 
> You might want to check if my maths are right, I didn't test.

I've noticed the same, and wrote the following patch last week, also untested.
I was planning to give it a try before sending it out, but as you've noticed
the same issue, here's the code if anyone wants to give it a try before I can.
Our calculations are similar, the main difference is the last line, and I
think yours read better.

From 22f7149916f590d3dbcc673dacc738441c741900 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2018 16:02:39 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] pwm: rcar: Optimize rcar_pwm_get_clock_division()

Get rid of the loop over all possible divisor values by computing the
divisor directly.

Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com>
---
 drivers/pwm/pwm-rcar.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-rcar.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-rcar.c
index a41812fc6f95..e6d73b94d5cf 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-rcar.c
+++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-rcar.c
@@ -68,21 +68,27 @@ static void rcar_pwm_update(struct rcar_pwm_chip *rp, u32 mask, u32 data,
 static int rcar_pwm_get_clock_division(struct rcar_pwm_chip *rp, int period_ns)
 {
 	unsigned long clk_rate = clk_get_rate(rp->clk);
-	unsigned long long max; /* max cycle / nanoseconds */
-	unsigned int div;
+	u64 max_period_ns;
+	u32 div;
 
 	if (clk_rate == 0)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
-	for (div = 0; div <= RCAR_PWM_MAX_DIVISION; div++) {
-		max = (unsigned long long)NSEC_PER_SEC * RCAR_PWM_MAX_CYCLE *
-			(1 << div);
-		do_div(max, clk_rate);
-		if (period_ns <= max)
-			break;
-	}
+	/*
+	 * The maximum achievable period is 2^24 * 1023 cycles of the internal
+	 * bus clock.
+	 */
+	max_period_ns = (1ULL << RCAR_PWM_MAX_DIVISION) * RCAR_PWM_MAX_CYCLE
+		      * NSEC_PER_SEC;
+	do_div(max_period_ns, clk_rate);
+
+	if (period_ns > max_period_ns)
+		return -ERANGE;
 
-	return (div <= RCAR_PWM_MAX_DIVISION) ? div : -ERANGE;
+	/* Calculate the divisor and round it up to the next power of two. */
+	div = DIV64_U64_ROUND_UP((u64)period_ns * clk_rate,
+				 (u64)RCAR_PWM_MAX_CYCLE * NSEC_PER_SEC);
+	return fls(2 * div - 1) - 1;
 }
 
 static void rcar_pwm_set_clock_control(struct rcar_pwm_chip *rp,

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

  reply	other threads:[~2018-12-09 20:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-07  8:29 [PATCH 0/5] pwm: rcar: Add support "atomic" API and workaround Yoshihiro Shimoda
2018-12-07  8:29 ` [PATCH 1/5] pwm: rcar: add rcar_pwm_calc_counter() to calculate PWMCNT value only Yoshihiro Shimoda
2018-12-07  9:00   ` Uwe Kleine-König
2018-12-07  8:29 ` [PATCH 2/5] pwm: rcar: Add support "atomic" API Yoshihiro Shimoda
2018-12-07  9:07   ` Uwe Kleine-König
2018-12-07  9:57     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2018-12-07 10:45       ` Uwe Kleine-König
2018-12-10  4:58         ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2018-12-07  8:29 ` [PATCH 3/5] pwm: rcar: Use "atomic" API on rcar_pwm_resume() Yoshihiro Shimoda
2018-12-07  8:29 ` [PATCH 4/5] pwm: rcar: remove legacy APIs Yoshihiro Shimoda
2018-12-07  8:29 ` [PATCH 5/5] pwm: rcar: add workaround to output "pseudo" low level Yoshihiro Shimoda
2018-12-07  9:13   ` Uwe Kleine-König
2018-12-10  4:49     ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2018-12-10  8:11       ` Uwe Kleine-König
2018-12-12  3:19         ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2018-12-12  7:37           ` Uwe Kleine-König
2018-12-12 10:49             ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2018-12-13  9:47     ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2018-12-13  9:52       ` Uwe Kleine-König
2018-12-13 10:53         ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2018-12-07 21:49 ` pwm: rcar: improve calculation of divider Uwe Kleine-König
2018-12-09 20:55   ` Laurent Pinchart [this message]
2018-12-10  5:09     ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2018-12-10  8:04       ` Uwe Kleine-König
2018-12-12  3:13         ` Yoshihiro Shimoda
2018-12-09 22:48 ` [PATCH 0/5] pwm: rcar: Add support "atomic" API and workaround Laurent Pinchart

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=1828832.OCLkmioh6N@avalon \
    --to=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
    --cc=linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
    --cc=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@renesas.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