From: Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org>
To: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com>
Cc: Benson Leung <bleung@chromium.org>,
Guenter Roeck <groeck@chromium.org>,
linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] pwm: cros-ec: Don't care about consumers in .get_state()
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 06:27:14 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zmk_wolV5vK4JPCV@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dbygoq4rzxnzforpdsvuy5jze2rxqszi6qxtx6q37yxwjo36o6@qfoc6iz2nbay>
On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 12:39:44PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 08:50:44AM +0000, Tzung-Bi Shih wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 10:44:15AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > > The get_state() callback is never called (in a visible way) after there
> > > is a consumer for a pwm device. The core handles loosing the information
> > > about duty_cycle just fine.
> >
> > ChromeOS EC has no separated "enabled" state, it sees `duty == 0` as
> > "disabled"[1]. 1db37f9561b2 ("pwm: cros-ec: Cache duty cycle value")
> > caches the value in kernel side so that it can retrieve the original duty
> > value even if (struct pwm_state *)->enabled is false.
>
> There is no need to cache, so the following would work:
Ack.
> > To make sure I understand, did you mean the original duty value could be less
> > important because:
> > - We are less caring as it is in a debug context at [2]?
> > - At [3], the PWM device is still initializing.
>
> It doesn't really matter that this is about debug or initialisation. The
> key here is that the core can handle the PWM using duty_cycle 0 (or
> anything else) when it was requested to be disabled.
>
>
> > [1]: https://crrev.com/0e16954460a08133b2557150e0897014ea2b9672/common/pwm.c#66
> > [2]: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.10-rc3/source/drivers/pwm/core.c#L52
> > [3]: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.10-rc3/source/drivers/pwm/core.c#L371
I was trying to understand the description in the commit message:
: The get_state() callback is never called (in a visible way) after there
: is a consumer for a pwm device.
I guess I understood; the core reads the duty value via get_state() when:
- Initializing the device for the intial value.
- Debugging for checking if apply() really takes effect.
What 1db37f9561b2 worried about is already addressed by the core[4].
[4]: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.10-rc3/source/drivers/pwm/core.c#L495
Reviewed-by: Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-12 6:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-07 8:44 [PATCH 0/3] pwm: cros-ec: Some simplifications Uwe Kleine-König
2024-06-07 8:44 ` [PATCH 1/3] pwm: cros-ec: Don't care about consumers in .get_state() Uwe Kleine-König
2024-06-07 16:43 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2024-06-08 14:24 ` kernel test robot
2024-06-11 8:50 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2024-06-11 10:39 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2024-06-12 6:27 ` Tzung-Bi Shih [this message]
2024-06-13 6:07 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2024-06-07 8:44 ` [PATCH 2/3] pwm: cros-ec: Simplify device tree xlation Uwe Kleine-König
2024-06-12 6:27 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2024-06-07 8:44 ` [PATCH 3/3] pwm: Make pwm_request_from_chip() private to the core Uwe Kleine-König
2024-06-12 6:27 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
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=Zmk_wolV5vK4JPCV@google.com \
--to=tzungbi@kernel.org \
--cc=bleung@chromium.org \
--cc=chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=groeck@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.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