On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 09:45:14AM +0100, Clément Péron wrote:
> From: Jernej Skrabec <[email protected]>
> 
> PWM core has an option to bypass whole logic and output unchanged source
> clock as PWM output. This is achieved by enabling bypass bit.
> 
> Note that when bypass is enabled, no other setting has any meaning, not
> even enable bit.
> 
> This mode of operation is needed to achieve high enough frequency to
> serve as clock source for AC200 chip which is integrated into same
> package as H6 SoC.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jernej Skrabec <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Clément Péron <[email protected]>
> ---
>  drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 44 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c
> index a10022d6c0fd..9cc928ab47bc 100644
> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c
> @@ -3,6 +3,10 @@
>   * Driver for Allwinner sun4i Pulse Width Modulation Controller
>   *
>   * Copyright (C) 2014 Alexandre Belloni 
> <[email protected]>
> + *
> + * Limitations:
> + * - When outputing the source clock directly, the PWM logic will be bypassed
> + *   and the currently running period is not guaranteed to be completed
>   */
>  
>  #include <linux/bitops.h>
> @@ -73,6 +77,7 @@ static const u32 prescaler_table[] = {
>  
>  struct sun4i_pwm_data {
>       bool has_prescaler_bypass;
> +     bool has_direct_mod_clk_output;
>       unsigned int npwm;
>  };
>  
> @@ -118,6 +123,20 @@ static void sun4i_pwm_get_state(struct pwm_chip *chip,
>  
>       val = sun4i_pwm_readl(sun4i_pwm, PWM_CTRL_REG);
>  
> +     /*
> +      * PWM chapter in H6 manual has a diagram which explains that if bypass
> +      * bit is set, no other setting has any meaning. Even more, experiment
> +      * proved that also enable bit is ignored in this case.
> +      */
> +     if ((val & BIT_CH(PWM_BYPASS, pwm->hwpwm)) &&
> +         sun4i_pwm->data->has_direct_mod_clk_output) {
> +             state->period = DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(NSEC_PER_SEC, clk_rate);
> +             state->duty_cycle = DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(state->period, 2);

I first thought you're losing precision here by reusing state->period
here, but with a divisor of 2 everything is fine.

> +             state->polarity = PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL;
> +             state->enabled = true;
> +             return;
> +     }
> +
>       if ((PWM_REG_PRESCAL(val, pwm->hwpwm) == PWM_PRESCAL_MASK) &&
>           sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass)
>               prescaler = 1;
> @@ -204,6 +223,7 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct 
> pwm_device *pwm,
>       struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm = to_sun4i_pwm_chip(chip);
>       struct pwm_state cstate;
>       u32 ctrl;
> +     bool bypass = false;
>       int ret;
>       unsigned int delay_us;
>       unsigned long now;
> @@ -218,9 +238,24 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct 
> pwm_device *pwm,
>               }
>       }
>  
> +     /*
> +      * Although it would make much more sense to check for bypass in
> +      * sun4i_pwm_calculate(), value of bypass bit also depends on "enabled".

I don't understand this reasoning. sun4i_pwm_calculate knows about
.enabled and also sun4i_pwm->data->has_direct_mod_clk_output. Maybe just
add a bool *bypass as parameter and move the logic there?

> +      */
> +     if (state->enabled) {
> +             u32 clk_rate = clk_get_rate(sun4i_pwm->clk);
> +             bypass = (state->period * clk_rate >= NSEC_PER_SEC) &&
> +                      (state->period * clk_rate < 2 * NSEC_PER_SEC) &&
> +                      (state->duty_cycle * clk_rate * 2 >= NSEC_PER_SEC);
> +     }
> +

This looks right now.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"linux-sunxi" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/linux-sunxi/20191113085858.76rad3vpszknu4cp%40pengutronix.de.

Reply via email to