lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jan]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/2] pwm: Add clock based PWM output driver
On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 11:04:31PM +0500, Nikita Travkin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Uwe Kleine-König писал(а) 17.01.2022 20:58:
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 08:03:35PM +0500, Nikita Travkin wrote:
> >> Some systems have clocks exposed to external devices. If the clock
> >> controller supports duty-cycle configuration, such clocks can be used as
> >> pwm outputs. In fact PWM and CLK subsystems are interfaced with in a
> >> similar way and an "opposite" driver already exists (clk-pwm). Add a
> >> driver that would enable pwm devices to be used via clk subsystem.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Nikita Travkin <nikita@trvn.ru>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Changes in v2:
> >> - Address Uwe's review comments:
> >> - Round set clk rate up
> >> - Add a description with limitations of the driver
> >> - Disable and unprepare clock before removing pwmchip
> >> ---
> >> drivers/pwm/Kconfig | 10 +++
> >> drivers/pwm/Makefile | 1 +
> >> drivers/pwm/pwm-clk.c | 143 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> 3 files changed, 154 insertions(+)
> >> create mode 100644 drivers/pwm/pwm-clk.c
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> >> index 21e3b05a5153..daa2491a4054 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> >> +++ b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> >> @@ -140,6 +140,16 @@ config PWM_BRCMSTB
> >> To compile this driver as a module, choose M Here: the module
> >> will be called pwm-brcmstb.c.
> >>
> >> +config PWM_CLK
> >> + tristate "Clock based PWM support"
> >> + depends on HAVE_CLK || COMPILE_TEST
> >> + help
> >> + Generic PWM framework driver for outputs that can be
> >> + muxed to clocks.
> >> +
> >> + To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module
> >> + will be called pwm-clk.
> >> +
> >> config PWM_CLPS711X
> >> tristate "CLPS711X PWM support"
> >> depends on ARCH_CLPS711X || COMPILE_TEST
> >> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Makefile b/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> >> index 708840b7fba8..4a860103c470 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> >> +++ b/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> >> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_BCM_KONA) += pwm-bcm-kona.o
> >> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_BCM2835) += pwm-bcm2835.o
> >> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_BERLIN) += pwm-berlin.o
> >> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_BRCMSTB) += pwm-brcmstb.o
> >> +obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_CLK) += pwm-clk.o
> >> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_CLPS711X) += pwm-clps711x.o
> >> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_CRC) += pwm-crc.o
> >> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_CROS_EC) += pwm-cros-ec.o
> >> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-clk.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-clk.c
> >> new file mode 100644
> >> index 000000000000..55fd320b9c19
> >> --- /dev/null
> >> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-clk.c
> >> @@ -0,0 +1,143 @@
> >> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> >> +/*
> >> + * Clock based PWM controller
> >> + *
> >> + * Copyright (c) 2021 Nikita Travkin <nikita@trvn.ru>
> >> + *
> >> + * This is an "adapter" driver that allows PWM consumers to use
> >> + * system clocks with duty cycle control as PWM outputs.
> >> + *
> >> + * Limitations:
> >> + * - There is no way to atomically set both clock rate and
> >> + * duty-cycle so glitches are possible when new pwm state
> >> + * is applied.
> >> + * - Period depends on the underlying clock driver and,
> >> + * in general, not guaranteed.
> >> + * - Underlying clock may not be able to give 100%
> >> + * duty cycle (constant on) and only set the closest
> >> + * possible duty cycle. (e.g. 99.9%)
> >
> > What about 0%?
>
> You're right, this is also a problematic case that I should've
> mentioned here. In fact I *did* have problems with zero written
> into the duty cycle register of my clock. I decided that it
> should be solved by the hardware driver so I sent a patch
> with a zero check there. (As otherwise there might be a clock
> that would properly support 0% and 100% cycles so making the
> write like this impossible is not a job of this driver I think)
>
> >
> > - Periods are not completed on changes in general.
>
> I suppose I should reword the limitation, dropping
> the reference to impossible atomic operations and
> just state that glitches are inevitable.
>
> > - Behaviour on disable depends on the underlaying clk, don't assume it
> > to provide the inactive level.
> >
>
> Hm, now thinking of it, I'm not sure if the clock line
> was set to logic 0 or was left floating (which is what I assume
> you mean by the undefined behavior here) on the clock I was
> debugging this on with an oscilloscope. (nor am I sure
> if I even can make such a conclusion by looking at that...)
>
> Do you think that this should be just documented in the
> limitations? Like:
>
> - Underlying clock may not be able to give 0% or 100%
> duty cycle (constant off or on) and only set the
> closest possible duty cycle. (e.g. 0.1% or 99.9%)

I would not bet on this. Maybe in such a case clk_set_duty_cycle might
also fail. The clk API isn't (TTBOMK) well-defined enough to make
promises like that.

> - When the PWM is disabled, the clock will be disabled
> as well. User should take care of properly pulling
> the line down in case the disabled clock leaves it
> floating.

This isn't universally true. I'd expect that just freezing (i.e. driving
either high or low depending on the state when the clk was stopped) is a
very usual behaviour. So a pull isn't always a good idea.

I would just keep that unspecified.

Best regards
Uwe

--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-01-17 21:06    [W:0.036 / U:1.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site