Hello Aleksandr,
On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 02:40:26PM +0300, Aleksandr Shubin wrote:
> Allwinner's D1, T113-S3 and R329 SoCs have a quite different PWM
> controllers with ones supported by pwm-sun4i driver.
>
> This patch adds a PWM controller driver for Allwinner's D1,
> T113-S3 and R329 SoCs. The main difference between these SoCs
> is the number of channels defined by the DT property.
>
> Signed-off-by: Aleksandr Shubin <privatesub2@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/pwm/Kconfig | 10 ++
> drivers/pwm/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/pwm/pwm-sun20i.c | 328 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 339 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 drivers/pwm/pwm-sun20i.c
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> index 8df861b1f4a3..05c48a36969e 100644
> --- a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> @@ -594,6 +594,16 @@ config PWM_SUN4I
> To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module
> will be called pwm-sun4i.
>
> +config PWM_SUN20I
> + tristate "Allwinner D1/T113s/R329 PWM support"
> + depends on ARCH_SUNXI || COMPILE_TEST
> + depends on COMMON_CLK
> + help
> + Generic PWM framework driver for Allwinner D1/T113s/R329 SoCs.
> +
> + To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module
> + will be called pwm-sun20i.
> +
> config PWM_SUNPLUS
> tristate "Sunplus PWM support"
> depends on ARCH_SUNPLUS || COMPILE_TEST
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Makefile b/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> index 19899b912e00..cea872e22c78 100644
> --- a/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_STM32) += pwm-stm32.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_STM32_LP) += pwm-stm32-lp.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_STMPE) += pwm-stmpe.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_SUN4I) += pwm-sun4i.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_SUN20I) += pwm-sun20i.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_SUNPLUS) += pwm-sunplus.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_TEGRA) += pwm-tegra.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_TIECAP) += pwm-tiecap.o
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun20i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun20i.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..20e6b7b5b62e
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun20i.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,328 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/*
> + * PWM Controller Driver for sunxi platforms (D1, T113-S3 and R329)
> + *
> + * Limitations:
> + * - When the parameters change, current running period will not be completed
> + * and run new settings immediately.
> + * - It output HIGH-Z state when PWM channel disabled.
> + *
> + * Copyright (c) 2023 Aleksandr Shubin <privatesub2@xxxxxxxxx>
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/bitfield.h>
> +#include <linux/clk.h>
> +#include <linux/err.h>
> +#include <linux/io.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/of_device.h>
> +#include <linux/pwm.h>
> +#include <linux/reset.h>
> +
> +#define PWM_CLK_CFG(chan) (0x20 + (((chan) >> 1) * 0x4))
> +#define PWM_CLK_CFG_SRC GENMASK(8, 7)
> +#define PWM_CLK_CFG_DIV_M GENMASK(3, 0)
> +
> +#define PWM_CLK_GATE 0x40
> +#define PWM_CLK_GATE_BYPASS(chan) BIT((chan) - 16)
Really? With chan == 0 this gives you BIT(-16).
> +#define PWM_CLK_GATE_GATING(chan) BIT(chan)
> +
> +#define PWM_ENABLE 0x80
> +#define PWM_ENABLE_EN(chan) BIT(chan)
> +
> +#define PWM_CTL(chan) (0x100 + (chan) * 0x20)
> +#define PWM_CTL_ACT_STA BIT(8)
> +#define PWM_CTL_PRESCAL_K GENMASK(7, 0)
> +
> +#define PWM_PERIOD(chan) (0x104 + (chan) * 0x20)
> +#define PWM_PERIOD_ENTIRE_CYCLE GENMASK(31, 16)
> +#define PWM_PERIOD_ACT_CYCLE GENMASK(15, 0)
> +
> +#define PWM_MAGIC (255 * 65535 + 2 * 65534 + 1)
A comment about PWM_MAGIC would be nice.
I'd like to have these register defines prefixed with (say) SUN20I_,
otherwise the names are too generic and likely overlap with other
defines.
> +struct sun20i_pwm_chip {
> + struct clk *clk_bus, *clk_hosc, *clk_apb0;
> + struct reset_control *rst;
> + struct pwm_chip chip;
> + void __iomem *base;
> + /* Mutex to protect pwm apply state */
> + struct mutex mutex;
> +};
> +
> +static inline struct sun20i_pwm_chip *to_sun20i_pwm_chip(struct pwm_chip *chip)
> +{
> + return container_of(chip, struct sun20i_pwm_chip, chip);
> +}
> +
> +static inline u32 sun20i_pwm_readl(struct sun20i_pwm_chip *chip,
> + unsigned long offset)
> +{
> + return readl(chip->base + offset);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void sun20i_pwm_writel(struct sun20i_pwm_chip *chip,
> + u32 val, unsigned long offset)
> +{
> + writel(val, chip->base + offset);
> +}
> +
> +static int sun20i_pwm_get_state(struct pwm_chip *chip,
> + struct pwm_device *pwm,
> + struct pwm_state *state)
> +{
> + struct sun20i_pwm_chip *sun20i_chip = to_sun20i_pwm_chip(chip);
> + u16 ent_cycle, act_cycle, prescal;
> + u64 clk_rate, tmp;
> + u8 div_id;
> + u32 val;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&sun20i_chip->mutex);
> +
> + val = sun20i_pwm_readl(sun20i_chip, PWM_CLK_CFG(pwm->hwpwm));
> + div_id = FIELD_GET(PWM_CLK_CFG_DIV_M, val);
> + if (FIELD_GET(PWM_CLK_CFG_SRC, val) == 0)
> + clk_rate = clk_get_rate(sun20i_chip->clk_hosc);
> + else
> + clk_rate = clk_get_rate(sun20i_chip->clk_apb0);
> +
> + val = sun20i_pwm_readl(sun20i_chip, PWM_CTL(pwm->hwpwm));
> + state->polarity = (PWM_CTL_ACT_STA & val) ? PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL : PWM_POLARITY_INVERSED;
> +
> + prescal = FIELD_GET(PWM_CTL_PRESCAL_K, val) + 1;
> +
> + val = sun20i_pwm_readl(sun20i_chip, PWM_ENABLE);
> + state->enabled = (PWM_ENABLE_EN(pwm->hwpwm) & val) ? true : false;
> +
> + val = sun20i_pwm_readl(sun20i_chip, PWM_PERIOD(pwm->hwpwm));
You can release the lock already here (or even after PWM_ENABLE is
read?)
> + act_cycle = FIELD_GET(PWM_PERIOD_ACT_CYCLE, val);
> + ent_cycle = FIELD_GET(PWM_PERIOD_ENTIRE_CYCLE, val);
> +
> + /*
> + * The duration of the active phase should not be longer
> + * than the duration of the period
> + */
> + if (act_cycle > ent_cycle)
> + act_cycle = ent_cycle;
> +
> + tmp = ((u64)(act_cycle) * prescal << div_id) * NSEC_PER_SEC;
act_cycle is a 16 bit value, prescal is <= 256 and div_id is <= 15. So
the maximal value tmp has to hold is 0x1dcd47329b00000000. This doesn't
fit into an u64. You need something like mul_u64_u64_div64_roundup here.
> + state->duty_cycle = DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(tmp, clk_rate);
> + tmp = ((u64)(ent_cycle) * prescal << div_id) * NSEC_PER_SEC;
> + state->period = DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(tmp, clk_rate);
> + mutex_unlock(&sun20i_chip->mutex);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int sun20i_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
> + const struct pwm_state *state)
> +{
> + struct sun20i_pwm_chip *sun20i_chip = to_sun20i_pwm_chip(chip);
> + u32 clk_gate, clk_cfg, pwm_en, ctl, period;
> + u64 bus_rate, hosc_rate, clk_div, val;
> + u32 prescaler, div_m;
> + bool use_bus_clk;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&sun20i_chip->mutex);
> +
> + pwm_en = sun20i_pwm_readl(sun20i_chip, PWM_ENABLE);
> +
> + if (state->enabled != pwm->state.enabled)
> + clk_gate = sun20i_pwm_readl(sun20i_chip, PWM_CLK_GATE);
> +
> + if (state->enabled != pwm->state.enabled && !state->enabled) {
> + clk_gate &= ~PWM_CLK_GATE_GATING(pwm->hwpwm);
> + pwm_en &= ~PWM_ENABLE_EN(pwm->hwpwm);
> + sun20i_pwm_writel(sun20i_chip, pwm_en, PWM_ENABLE);
> + sun20i_pwm_writel(sun20i_chip, clk_gate, PWM_CLK_GATE);
Does ENABLE configure if the output pin is driven?
> + }
You can these to like:
if (state->enabled != pwm->state.enabled) {
clk_gate = ...
if (!state->enabled) {
...
}
}
> +
> + if (state->polarity != pwm->state.polarity ||
> + state->duty_cycle != pwm->state.duty_cycle ||
> + state->period != pwm->state.period) {
> + ctl = sun20i_pwm_readl(sun20i_chip, PWM_CTL(pwm->hwpwm));
> + clk_cfg = sun20i_pwm_readl(sun20i_chip, PWM_CLK_CFG(pwm->hwpwm));
> + hosc_rate = clk_get_rate(sun20i_chip->clk_hosc);
> + bus_rate = clk_get_rate(sun20i_chip->clk_apb0);
> + if (pwm_en & PWM_ENABLE_EN(pwm->hwpwm ^ 1)) {
> + /* if the neighbor channel is enable, check period only */
> + use_bus_clk = FIELD_GET(PWM_CLK_CFG_SRC, clk_cfg) != 0;
> + val = state->period * (use_bus_clk ? bus_rate : hosc_rate);
This can overflow.
> + do_div(val, NSEC_PER_SEC);
> +
> + div_m = FIELD_GET(PWM_CLK_CFG_DIV_M, clk_cfg);
> + } else {
> + /* check period and select clock source */
> + use_bus_clk = false;
> + val = state->period * hosc_rate;
> + do_div(val, NSEC_PER_SEC);
> + if (val <= 1) {
> + use_bus_clk = true;
> + val = state->period * bus_rate;
> + do_div(val, NSEC_PER_SEC);
> + if (val <= 1) {
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + goto unlock_mutex;
> + }
> + }
> + div_m = fls(DIV_ROUND_DOWN_ULL(val, PWM_MAGIC));
> + if (div_m >= 9) {
What is 9 here? Something like DIV_M_MAX? There are a few other
constants that might deserve a name.
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + goto unlock_mutex;
> + }
> +
> + /* set up the CLK_DIV_M and clock CLK_SRC */
> + clk_cfg = FIELD_PREP(PWM_CLK_CFG_DIV_M, div_m);
> + clk_cfg |= FIELD_PREP(PWM_CLK_CFG_SRC, use_bus_clk);
> +
> + sun20i_pwm_writel(sun20i_chip, clk_cfg, PWM_CLK_CFG(pwm->hwpwm));
> + }
> +
> + /* calculate prescaler, PWM entire cycle */
> + clk_div = val >> div_m;
> + if (clk_div <= 65534) {
> + prescaler = 0;
> + } else {
> + prescaler = DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(clk_div - 65534, 65535);
This looks strange. The result is the same as
DIV_ROUND_DOWN_ULL(clk_div, 65535) which by the way also does the right
thing for clk_div <= 65534.
> + if (prescaler >= 256) {
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + goto unlock_mutex;
If this happens the requested period is too big, right? Please use
prescaler = 255;
then and proceed. (The idea is to configure the biggest period that is
not bigger than the requested period.)
> + }
> + do_div(clk_div, prescaler + 1);
> + }
> +
> + period = FIELD_PREP(PWM_PERIOD_ENTIRE_CYCLE, clk_div);
> +
> + /* set duty cycle */
> + val = state->duty_cycle * (use_bus_clk ? bus_rate : hosc_rate);
> + do_div(val, NSEC_PER_SEC);
> + clk_div = val >> div_m;
> + do_div(clk_div, prescaler + 1);
> +
> + /*
> + * The formula of the output period and the duty-cycle for PWM are as follows.
> + * T period = (PWM01_CLK / PWM0_PRESCALE_K)^-1 * (PPR0.PWM_ENTIRE_CYCLE + 1)
> + * T high-level = (PWM01_CLK / PWM0_PRESCALE_K)^-1 * PPR0.PWM_ACT_CYCLE
> + * Duty-cycle = T high-level / T period
> + * In accordance with this formula, in order to set the duty-cycle to 100%,
> + * it is necessary that PWM_ACT_CYCLE >= PWM_ENTIRE_CYCLE + 1
> + */
> + if (state->duty_cycle == state->period)
> + clk_div++;
Can it happen, that clk_div gets too big here?
> + period |= FIELD_PREP(PWM_PERIOD_ACT_CYCLE, clk_div);
It's a bit irritating (to me at least) that the variable "period" holds
the configuration for the duty_cycle. Maybe call it "reg_period" or
similar to not confuse it with state->period?
> + sun20i_pwm_writel(sun20i_chip, period, PWM_PERIOD(pwm->hwpwm));
> +
> + ctl = FIELD_PREP(PWM_CTL_PRESCAL_K, prescaler);
> + if (state->polarity == PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL)
> + ctl |= PWM_CTL_ACT_STA;
> +
> + sun20i_pwm_writel(sun20i_chip, ctl, PWM_CTL(pwm->hwpwm));
Is there a glitch if you switch polarity? i.e. after period is written a
few lines above, a new period starts already and if you then invert
PWM_CTL_ACT_STA, the output immediately switches polarity? If so that's
something to mention in the Limitations section.
> + }
> +[...]
> +static int sun20i_pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct sun20i_pwm_chip *sun20i_chip;
> + int ret;
> +
> + sun20i_chip = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*sun20i_chip), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!sun20i_chip)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + sun20i_chip->base = devm_platform_ioremap_resource(pdev, 0);
> + if (IS_ERR(sun20i_chip->base))
> + return PTR_ERR(sun20i_chip->base);
> +
> + sun20i_chip->clk_bus = devm_clk_get_enabled(&pdev->dev, "bus");
> + if (IS_ERR(sun20i_chip->clk_bus))
> + return dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, PTR_ERR(sun20i_chip->clk_bus),
> + "failed to get bus clock\n");
> +
> + sun20i_chip->clk_hosc = devm_clk_get_enabled(&pdev->dev, "hosc");
> + if (IS_ERR(sun20i_chip->clk_hosc))
> + return dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, PTR_ERR(sun20i_chip->clk_hosc),
> + "failed to get hosc clock\n");
> +
> + sun20i_chip->clk_apb0 = devm_clk_get_enabled(&pdev->dev, "apb0");
> + if (IS_ERR(sun20i_chip->clk_apb0))
> + return dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, PTR_ERR(sun20i_chip->clk_apb0),
> + "failed to get apb0 clock\n");
> +
> + sun20i_chip->rst = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive(&pdev->dev, NULL);
> + if (IS_ERR(sun20i_chip->rst))
> + return dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, PTR_ERR(sun20i_chip->rst),
> + "failed to get bus reset\n");
> +
> + ret = of_property_read_u32(pdev->dev.of_node, "allwinner,pwm-channels",
> + &sun20i_chip->chip.npwm);
> + if (ret)
> + sun20i_chip->chip.npwm = 8;
The register layout allows npwm <= 16 only, right? I suggest to add a
check for that.
> + /* Deassert reset */
> + ret = reset_control_deassert(sun20i_chip->rst);
> + if (ret)
> + return dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, ret, "failed to deassert reset\n");
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
