Caesar,
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 6:27 PM, caesar <caesar.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Doug,
>
> 在 2014年08月07日 06:46, Doug Anderson 写道:
>
>> Caesar,
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 3:21 AM, Caesar Wang <caesar.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> +static const struct rockchip_pwm_data pwm_data_v1 = {
>>> + .regs.duty = PWM_HRC,
>>> + .regs.period = PWM_LRC,
>>> + .regs.cntr = PWM_CNTR,
>>> + .regs.ctrl = PWM_CTRL,
>>> + .prescaler = PRESCALER,
>>> + .set_enable = rockchip_pwm_set_enable_v1,
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +static const struct rockchip_pwm_data pwm_data_v2 = {
>>> + .regs.duty = PWM_LRC,
>>> + .regs.period = PWM_HRC,
>>> + .regs.cntr = PWM_CNTR,
>>> + .regs.ctrl = PWM_CTRL,
>>> + .prescaler = PRESCALER-1,
>>> + .set_enable = rockchip_pwm_set_enable_v2,
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +static const struct rockchip_pwm_data pwm_data_vop = {
>>> + .regs.duty = PWM_LRC,
>>> + .regs.period = PWM_HRC,
>>> + .regs.cntr = PWM_CTRL,
>>> + .regs.ctrl = PWM_CNTR,
>>
>> Did you really mean to flip CTRL and CNTR here? If so, that's super
>> confusing and deserves a comment. AKA, I think the above should not
>> be:
>>
>> + .regs.cntr = PWM_CTRL,
>> + .regs.ctrl = PWM_CNTR,
>>
>> ...but should be
>>
>> + .regs.cntr = PWM_CNTR,
>> + .regs.ctrl = PWM_CTRL,
>>
>> If you didn't mean to flip CTRL and CNTR here, then just get rid of
>> pwm_data_vop and refer to pwm_data_v2. In fact, I'd suggest that you
>> totally remove the "rockchip,vop-pwm" since there's nothing different
>> between "rockchip,rk3288-pwm" and "rockchip,vop-pwm".
>
>
> Sorry,I think it's no problem. the "rockchip,rk3288-pwm" and
> "rockchip,vop-pwm" are seperate PWM controllers.
> They are just different registers address between CNTR and CTRL .
OK, I looked up in the TRM. Right, the CNTR and CTRL are flipped on
the vop. So I think that the only change you need is to add:
#define PWM_VOP_CTRL 0x00
#define PWM_VOP_CNTR 0x0c
...then use these new #defines for the vop structure.
As you have the code written right now it's very confusing. The new
#defines will fix this.
>> Have you validated Thierry's suggestion to allow you to access your
>> memory range?
>
> Yes,we have solve it in lcdc driver.
> The Mark Yao have the submission in [0].
>
> [0]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/4/20
Excellent! Then we should be able to land after you fix the above.
-Doug
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
