From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752526AbcF1Kcf (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jun 2016 06:32:35 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f65.google.com ([209.85.220.65]:32844 "EHLO mail-pa0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752250AbcF1Kcc (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jun 2016 06:32:32 -0400 Message-ID: <57725238.9010809@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 18:32:24 +0800 From: Caesar Wang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Douglas Anderson , Mark Brown CC: boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com, Heiko Stuebner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, briannorris@chromium.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, lee.jones@linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: pwm: Fix regulator ramp delay for continuous mode References: <1467089591-7631-1-git-send-email-dianders@chromium.org> In-Reply-To: <1467089591-7631-1-git-send-email-dianders@chromium.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2016年06月28日 12:53, Douglas Anderson wrote: > The original commit adding support for continuous voltage mode didn't > handle the regulator ramp delay properly. It treated the delay as a > fixed delay in uS despite the property being defined as uV / uS. Let's > adjust it. Luckily there appear to be no users of this ramp delay for > PWM regulators (as per grepping through device trees in linuxnext). > > Note also that the upper bound of usleep_range probably shouldn't be a > full 1 ms longer than the lower bound since I've seen plenty of hardware > with a ramp rate of ~5000 uS / uV and for small jumps the total delays > are in the tens of uS. 1000 is way too much. We'll try to be dynamic > and use 10% I'm agree with the dynamic and use 10%. > > Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson Tested-by: Caesar Wang Tested for my rk3399 board. That's still happy work for my board. .. [ 2891.541958] pwm_regulator_set_voltage: delay=38, min-v=800000, old-v=1024000 [ 2898.188785] pwm_regulator_set_voltage: delay=13, min-v=875000, old-v=800000 [ 2898.211873] pwm_regulator_set_voltage: delay=8, min-v=925000, old-v=877000 [ 2898.312026] pwm_regulator_set_voltage: delay=21, min-v=-800000, old-v=926000 .. > --- > Note that this patch is atop Boris's recent PWM regulator fixes. If > desired it wouldn't be too hard to write it atop the old code, though > quite honestly anyone using a PWM regulator should probably be using his > new code. > > drivers/regulator/pwm-regulator.c | 9 +++++++-- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/regulator/pwm-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/pwm-regulator.c > index fa1c74c77bb0..de94d19f6e1f 100644 > --- a/drivers/regulator/pwm-regulator.c > +++ b/drivers/regulator/pwm-regulator.c > @@ -188,6 +188,7 @@ static int pwm_regulator_set_voltage(struct regulator_dev *rdev, > struct pwm_state pstate; > unsigned int diff_duty; > unsigned int dutycycle; > + int old_uV = pwm_regulator_get_voltage(rdev); > int ret; > > pwm_init_state(drvdata->pwm, &pstate); > @@ -219,8 +220,12 @@ static int pwm_regulator_set_voltage(struct regulator_dev *rdev, > return ret; > } > > - /* Delay required by PWM regulator to settle to the new voltage */ > - usleep_range(ramp_delay, ramp_delay + 1000); > + if (ramp_delay == 0) > + return 0; > + > + /* Ramp delay is in uV/uS. Adjust to uS and delay */ > + ramp_delay = DIV_ROUND_UP(abs(req_min_uV - old_uV), ramp_delay); > + usleep_range(ramp_delay, ramp_delay + DIV_ROUND_UP(ramp_delay, 10)); > > return 0; > }