On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 05:47:59PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 7/9/20 4:50 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 11:14:22PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > > > The datasheet specifies that programming the base_unit part of the > > > ctrl register to 0 results in a contineous low signal. > > > > > > Adjust the get_state method to reflect this by setting pwm_state.period > > > to 1 and duty_cycle to 0. > > > > ... > > > > > + if (freq == 0) { > > > + /* In this case the PWM outputs a continous low signal */ > > > > > + state->period = 1; > > > > I guess this should be something like half of the range (so base unit calc > > will give 128). Because with period = 1 (too small) it will give too small > > base unit (if apply) and as a result we get high frequency pulses. > > You are right, that if after this the user only changes the duty-cycle > things will work very poorly, we will end up with a base_unit value of > e.g 65535 and then have almost no duty-cycle resolution at all. Is this a problem of the consumer that we don't need to solve? Are there known consumers running into this problem? pwm_lpss_prepare() is buggy here, a request for a too low period should be refused. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel