From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F43DC47089 for ; Thu, 27 May 2021 13:53:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36E21613CA for ; Thu, 27 May 2021 13:53:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236629AbhE0NzZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 May 2021 09:55:25 -0400 Received: from relay3-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.195]:58155 "EHLO relay3-d.mail.gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S236580AbhE0NzY (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 May 2021 09:55:24 -0400 Received: (Authenticated sender: alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com) by relay3-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2548660008; Thu, 27 May 2021 13:53:48 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 27 May 2021 15:53:48 +0200 From: Alexandre Belloni To: Roman Beranek Cc: Thierry Reding , Emil Lenngren , Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= , Lee Jones , Maxime Ripard , Chen-Yu Tsai , Jernej Skrabec , linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev, linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com, Roman Beranek Subject: Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: Avoid waiting until the next period Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 27/05/2021 14:10:35+0200, Roman Beranek wrote: > Hello Thierry, > > On Tue May 25, 2021 at 6:41 PM CEST, Thierry Reding wrote: > > I'm pretty sure Alexandre at the time reported that the instantiation of > > the controller that he was using required waiting for the period to > > complete before the output went to the disabled state. It's possible > > that this was changed in subsequent versions of the IP, so perhaps we > > need to distinguish based on compatible string? > I can't recall what I tested exactly. I probably assumed it would take the whole period to update because this is how it is working on v1 of the atmel PWM and this is what I was working on at the time. I did test on a CHIP. I guess linux-sunxi.org is more correct than I was at the time. > I've got myself an A10 (sun4i) board to test my new patchset with and > indeed the 2 cycles seem to be enough. > > I have yet to write a cover letter for it though, expect it by Monday > at the latest. > > Best regards, > Roman -- Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com