[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

Hi Thierry, On Thu, 10 Mar 2016 18:54:38 +0100 Thierry Reding wrote: > On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 08:34:19AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: > > Thierry, > > > > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 3:14 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: > > > So just to summarize: > > > > >

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 08:34:19AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: > Thierry, > > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 3:14 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: > > So just to summarize: > > > > * Add pwm_get_state(), pwm_apply_state(), pwm_get_args(). > > pwm_get_state() initially returns 0 for duty

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

Thierry, On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 3:14 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: > So just to summarize: > > * Add pwm_get_state(), pwm_apply_state(), pwm_get_args(). > pwm_get_state() initially returns 0 for duty cycle if driver doesn't > support readout. > > * Re-implement pwm_get_period()

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

Thierry, On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Doug Anderson wrote: > Thierry, > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Thierry Reding > wrote: >>> pwm_get_period(): get the period of the PWM; if the PWM has not yet >>> been configured by software this

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

Thierry, On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Thierry Reding wrote: >> pwm_get_period(): get the period of the PWM; if the PWM has not yet >> been configured by software this gets the default period (possibly >> specified by the device tree). > > No. I think we'll need a

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 09:35:48AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 6:38 AM, Thierry Reding > wrote: [...] > > That's not quite what I was thinking. If hardware readout is supported > > then whatever we report back should be the current hardware

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

Thierry, On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 6:38 AM, Thierry Reding wrote: >> > Furthermore it's out of the question that changes to the API will be >> > required. That's precisely the reason why the atomic PWM proposal came >> > about. It's an attempt to solve the shortcomings of

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 03:01:50PM +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote: > Hi Mark, Thierry, > > On Thu, 4 Feb 2016 11:02:03 + > Mark Brown wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 11:04:20AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: > > > > > Sure. ...but you agree that somehow you need a new

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:15:09AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: > Thierry, > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Thierry Reding > wrote: [...] > >> When we add a new feature then it's expected that only updated drivers > >> will support that feature. > >> > >> We need to

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

Mark, On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:15:09AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: > >> Note that historically I remember that Linus Torvalds has stated that >> there is no stable API within the Linux kernel and that forcing the >>

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:15:09AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: > Note that historically I remember that Linus Torvalds has stated that > there is no stable API within the Linux kernel and that forcing the > in-kernel API to never change was bad for software development. I > tracked down my

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

Thierry, On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Thierry Reding wrote: >> This is because only some drivers would be able to read the hardware >> state? I'm not sure how we can get away from that. In all proposals >> we've talked about (including what you propose below,

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 11:04:20AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: > Thierry > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 6:53 AM, Thierry Reding > wrote: > >> A) The software state here is the period and flags (AKA "inverted), > >> right? It does seem possible that you could apply the

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

Thierry, On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Doug Anderson wrote: > Thierry > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 6:53 AM, Thierry Reding > wrote: >>> A) The software state here is the period and flags (AKA "inverted), >>> right? It does seem possible that you

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 11:04:20AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: > Sure. ...but you agree that somehow you need a new API call for this, > right? Somehow the PWM regulator needs to be able to say that it > wants the hardware state, not the initial state as specified in the > device tree.

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:51:20AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Thierry Reding > wrote: > > I really don't understand this design decision. I presume that the PWM > > controlling this system-critical logic is driven by the SoC?

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

Thierry On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 6:53 AM, Thierry Reding wrote: >> A) The software state here is the period and flags (AKA "inverted), >> right? It does seem possible that you could apply the period and >> flags while keeping the calculated bootup duty cycle percentage

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 08:28:31AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: > Thierry and Boris, > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Thierry Reding > wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 12:12:12PM +0200, Heiko Stübner wrote: > >> Hi Thierry, > >> > >> Am Montag, 21. September 2015,

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

Thierry and Boris, On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 12:12:12PM +0200, Heiko Stübner wrote: >> Hi Thierry, >> >> Am Montag, 21. September 2015, 11:33:17 schrieb Boris Brezillon: >> > Hello, >> > >> > This series adds

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

Hi Thierry, On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:08:55 +0100 Thierry Reding wrote: > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 08:28:31AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: > > Thierry and Boris, > > > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Thierry Reding > > wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

Hi, On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Thierry Reding wrote: > I really don't understand this design decision. I presume that the PWM > controlling this system-critical logic is driven by the SoC? So if the > regulator is system-critical, doesn't that make it a chicken

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

Hi Thierry, On Tue, 10 Nov 2015 18:34:16 +0100 Thierry Reding wrote: > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 12:12:12PM +0200, Heiko Stübner wrote: > > Hi Thierry, > > > > Am Montag, 21. September 2015, 11:33:17 schrieb Boris Brezillon: > > > Hello, > > > > > > This series adds

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 12:12:12PM +0200, Heiko Stübner wrote: > Hi Thierry, > > Am Montag, 21. September 2015, 11:33:17 schrieb Boris Brezillon: > > Hello, > > > > This series adds support for atomic PWM update, or IOW, the capability > > to update all the parameters of a PWM device

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

Hi Thierry, Am Montag, 21. September 2015, 11:33:17 schrieb Boris Brezillon: > Hello, > > This series adds support for atomic PWM update, or IOW, the capability > to update all the parameters of a PWM device (enabled/disabled, period, > duty and polarity) in one go. is anything more blocking

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

Hi Thierry, On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 11:33:17 +0200 Boris Brezillon wrote: > Hello, > > This series adds support for atomic PWM update, or IOW, the capability > to update all the parameters of a PWM device (enabled/disabled, period, > duty and polarity) in one

[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] pwm: add support for atomic update

Hi Boris, Am Montag, 21. September 2015, 11:33:17 schrieb Boris Brezillon: > This series adds support for atomic PWM update, or IOW, the capability > to update all the parameters of a PWM device (enabled/disabled, period, > duty and polarity) in one go. I gave this v3 a spin on a rk3288-veyron