From: "Uwe Kleine-König" <ukleinek@kernel.org>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org, linux@roeck-us.net,
julian.friedrich@frequentis.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] hwmon: nct6775: Register fan PWMs as PWM chip
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2026 18:54:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aaCHc4q0I8Az7hpx@monoceros> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260225125159.20822-1-richard@nod.at>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4169 bytes --]
Hello Richard,
just a very quick look:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 01:51:59PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> @@ -3501,6 +3592,131 @@ static int add_temp_sensors(struct nct6775_data *data, const u16 *regp,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static int nct6775_pwm_round_waveform_fromhw(struct pwm_chip *chip,
> + struct pwm_device *pwm,
> + const void *_wfhw,
> + struct pwm_waveform *wf)
> +{
> + struct nct6775_data *data = pwmchip_get_drvdata(chip);
> + const u8 *wfhw = _wfhw;
> +
> + if (get_pwm_period(data, pwm->hwpwm, &wf->period_length_ns))
> + return 1;
That looks wrong. In principle nct6775_pwm_round_waveform_fromhw()
doesn't depend on hardware state. It's supposed to just convert the
settings stored in _wfhw to wf. If you know that some things are
constant during the lifetime of the PWM and you read those from
hardware, return a proper error code, not 1.
> + wf->duty_length_ns = mul_u64_u64_div_u64(*wfhw, wf->period_length_ns, 255);
> + wf->duty_offset_ns = 0;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int nct6775_pwm_round_waveform_tohw(struct pwm_chip *chip,
> + struct pwm_device *pwm,
> + const struct pwm_waveform *wf,
> + void *_wfhw)
> +{
> + struct nct6775_data *data = pwmchip_get_drvdata(chip);
> + u8 *wfhw = _wfhw;
> + u64 cur_period;
> +
> + if (wf->period_length_ns == 0) {
> + *wfhw = 0;
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + if (get_pwm_period(data, pwm->hwpwm, &cur_period))
> + return 1;
> +
> + if (wf->duty_length_ns >= cur_period)
> + *wfhw = 255;
> + else
> + *wfhw = mul_u64_u64_div_u64(wf->duty_length_ns, 255, wf->period_length_ns);
> +
> + if (wf->period_length_ns != cur_period)
> + return 1;
Rounding down wf->period_length_ns is fine, so this must be:
if (wf->period_length_ns < cur_period)
return 1;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +
> +static int nct6775_pwm_write_waveform(struct pwm_chip *chip,
> + struct pwm_device *pwm,
> + const void *_wfhw)
> +{
> + struct nct6775_data *data = pwmchip_get_drvdata(chip);
> + const u8 *wfhw = _wfhw;
> +
> + return write_pwm(data, pwm->hwpwm, 0, *wfhw);
> +}
> +
> +static int nct6775_pwm_read_waveform(struct pwm_chip *chip,
> + struct pwm_device *pwm,
> + void *_wfhw)
> +{
> + struct nct6775_data *data = nct6775_update_device(pwmchip_parent(chip));
> + u8 *wfhw = _wfhw;
> + int val;
> +
> + val = read_pwm(data, pwm->hwpwm, 0);
> + if (val < 0)
> + return val;
> +
> + *wfhw = (u8)val;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int nct6775_pwm_request(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm)
> +{
> + struct nct6775_data *data = pwmchip_get_drvdata(chip);
> +
> + if (data->pwm_enable[pwm->hwpwm] > manual)
> + return -EBUSY;
> +
> + data->pwm_exported[pwm->hwpwm] = true;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void nct6775_pwm_free(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm)
> +{
> + struct nct6775_data *data = pwmchip_get_drvdata(chip);
> +
> + data->pwm_exported[pwm->hwpwm] = false;
> +}
> +
> +static const struct pwm_ops nct6775_pwm_ops = {
> + .sizeof_wfhw = sizeof(u8),
> + .request = nct6775_pwm_request,
> + .free = nct6775_pwm_free,
> + .round_waveform_fromhw = nct6775_pwm_round_waveform_fromhw,
> + .round_waveform_tohw = nct6775_pwm_round_waveform_tohw,
> + .write_waveform = nct6775_pwm_write_waveform,
> + .read_waveform = nct6775_pwm_read_waveform,
> +};
> +
> +static int nct6775_register_pwm_chip(struct device *dev, struct nct6775_data *data)
> +{
> + struct pwm_chip *chip;
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (data->pwm_num < 1)
> + return 0;
> +
> + chip = devm_pwmchip_alloc(dev, data->pwm_num, 0);
> + if (IS_ERR(chip))
> + return PTR_ERR(chip);
> +
> + chip->ops = &nct6775_pwm_ops;
> + pwmchip_set_drvdata(chip, data);
> +
> + ret = devm_pwmchip_add(dev, chip);
> + if (ret)
> + return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Could not add PWM chip\n");
> +
> +
s/\n\n/\n/
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> int nct6775_probe(struct device *dev, struct nct6775_data *data,
> const struct regmap_config *regmapcfg)
> {
Best regards
Uwe
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-26 17:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-25 12:51 [PATCH] [RFC] hwmon: nct6775: Register fan PWMs as PWM chip Richard Weinberger
2026-02-26 17:54 ` Uwe Kleine-König [this message]
2026-02-26 18:36 ` Richard Weinberger
2026-02-27 19:57 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2026-02-26 22:38 ` Guenter Roeck
2026-02-27 7:46 ` Richard Weinberger
2026-02-27 8:17 ` Guenter Roeck
2026-02-27 20:02 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2026-02-27 20:59 ` Guenter Roeck
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=aaCHc4q0I8Az7hpx@monoceros \
--to=ukleinek@kernel.org \
--cc=julian.friedrich@frequentis.com \
--cc=linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
/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