On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 3:11 AM Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> A previous change in the pwm core (namely 01ccf903edd6 ("pwm: Let
> pwm_get_state() return the last implemented state")) changed the
> semantic of pwm_get_state() and disclosed an (as it seems) common
> problem in lowlevel PWM drivers. By not relying on the period and duty
> cycle being retrievable from a disabled PWM this type of problem is
> worked around.
>
> Apart from this issue only calling the pwm_get_state/pwm_apply_state
> combo once is also more effective.
>
> Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Hello,
>
> There are now two reports about 01ccf903edd6 breaking a backlight. As
> far as I understand the problem this is a combination of the backend pwm
> driver yielding surprising results and the pwm-bl driver doing things
> more complicated than necessary.
>
> So I guess this patch works around these problems. Still it would be
> interesting to find out the details in the imx driver that triggers the
> problem. So Adam, can you please instrument the pwm-imx27 driver to
> print *state at the beginning of pwm_imx27_apply() and the end of
> pwm_imx27_get_state() and provide the results?
>
> Note I only compile tested this change.
>
> Best regards
> Uwe
>
> drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c | 34 +++++++++++---------------------
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c b/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c
> index 746eebc411df..ddebd62b3978 100644
> --- a/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c
> +++ b/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c
> @@ -42,10 +42,8 @@ struct pwm_bl_data {
>
> static void pwm_backlight_power_on(struct pwm_bl_data *pb)
> {
> - struct pwm_state state;
> int err;
>
> - pwm_get_state(pb->pwm, &state);
> if (pb->enabled)
> return;
>
> @@ -53,9 +51,6 @@ static void pwm_backlight_power_on(struct pwm_bl_data *pb)
> if (err < 0)
> dev_err(pb->dev, "failed to enable power supply\n");
>
> - state.enabled = true;
> - pwm_apply_state(pb->pwm, &state);
> -
> if (pb->post_pwm_on_delay)
> msleep(pb->post_pwm_on_delay);
>
> @@ -67,40 +62,27 @@ static void pwm_backlight_power_on(struct pwm_bl_data *pb)
>
> static void pwm_backlight_power_off(struct pwm_bl_data *pb)
> {
> - struct pwm_state state;
> -
> - pwm_get_state(pb->pwm, &state);
> - if (!pb->enabled)
> - return;
> -
> if (pb->enable_gpio)
> gpiod_set_value_cansleep(pb->enable_gpio, 0);
>
> if (pb->pwm_off_delay)
> msleep(pb->pwm_off_delay);
>
> - state.enabled = false;
> - state.duty_cycle = 0;
> - pwm_apply_state(pb->pwm, &state);
> -
> regulator_disable(pb->power_supply);
> pb->enabled = false;
> }
>
> -static int compute_duty_cycle(struct pwm_bl_data *pb, int brightness)
> +static int compute_duty_cycle(struct pwm_bl_data *pb, int brightness, struct pwm_state *state)
> {
> unsigned int lth = pb->lth_brightness;
> - struct pwm_state state;
> u64 duty_cycle;
>
> - pwm_get_state(pb->pwm, &state);
> -
> if (pb->levels)
> duty_cycle = pb->levels[brightness];
> else
> duty_cycle = brightness;
>
> - duty_cycle *= state.period - lth;
> + duty_cycle *= state->period - lth;
> do_div(duty_cycle, pb->scale);
>
> return duty_cycle + lth;
> @@ -122,12 +104,20 @@ static int pwm_backlight_update_status(struct backlight_device *bl)
>
> if (brightness > 0) {
> pwm_get_state(pb->pwm, &state);
> - state.duty_cycle = compute_duty_cycle(pb, brightness);
> + state.duty_cycle = compute_duty_cycle(pb, brightness, &state);
> + state.enabled = true;
> pwm_apply_state(pb->pwm, &state);
> +
> pwm_backlight_power_on(pb);
> - } else
> + } else {
> pwm_backlight_power_off(pb);
>
> + pwm_get_state(pb->pwm, &state);
> + state.enabled = false;
> + state.duty_cycle = 0;
> + pwm_apply_state(pb->pwm, &state);
Both cases where (brightness > 0) and 'else' contain the
pwm_apply_state() call with the same parameters. Can this be moved
outside of the if statements?
> + }
> +
> if (pb->notify_after)
> pb->notify_after(pb->dev, brightness);
>
> --
> 2.23.0
>
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
