2018-02-28 9:55 GMT+08:00 André Przywara <andre.przywara@xxxxxxx>: > Hi, > > On 25/02/18 13:53, hao_zhang wrote: >> This patch add allwinner sun8i pwm support. > > Again, the subject line is too generic. Mention the R40? > > Can you elaborate here a bit? Mention that is used on the R40, but not > other sun8i SoCs, for instance. And mention that this is very different > from the sun4i-pwm device, so justifies a new driver. Possibly mention > some features? And that we for now just implement a subset of them. Thanks for reviews, elaborate it next patch:) > >> >> Signed-off-by: hao_zhang <hao5781286@xxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/pwm/Kconfig | 10 ++ >> drivers/pwm/Makefile | 1 + >> drivers/pwm/pwm-sun8i.c | 401 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > I am not too happy with this name, but I guess there are no better > alternatives, so it's probably OK to keep it. > >> 3 files changed, 412 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 drivers/pwm/pwm-sun8i.c >> >> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig >> index 763ee50..7e68d0f 100644 >> --- a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig >> +++ b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig >> @@ -444,6 +444,16 @@ config PWM_SUN4I >> To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module >> will be called pwm-sun4i. >> >> +config PWM_SUN8I >> + tristate "Allwinner PWM SUN8I support" >> + depends on ARCH_SUNXI || COMPILE_TEST >> + depends on HAS_IOMEM && COMMON_CLK >> + help >> + Generic PWM framework driver for Allwinner SoCs. > > Mmh, not really. So far there is only one SoC using this. Maybe: > Driver for the enhanced PWM IP used in some newer Allwinner > SoCs. > >> + >> + To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module >> + will be called pwm-sun8i. >> + >> config PWM_TEGRA >> tristate "NVIDIA Tegra PWM support" >> depends on ARCH_TEGRA >> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Makefile b/drivers/pwm/Makefile >> index 0258a74..cd6bf40 100644 >> --- a/drivers/pwm/Makefile >> +++ b/drivers/pwm/Makefile >> @@ -44,6 +44,7 @@ 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-$(CONFIG_PWM_SUN8I) += pwm-sun8i.o >> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_TEGRA) += pwm-tegra.o >> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_TIECAP) += pwm-tiecap.o >> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_TIEHRPWM) += pwm-tiehrpwm.o >> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun8i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun8i.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..cf23b0a >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun8i.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,401 @@ >> +#include <linux/bitops.h> >> +#include <linux/clk.h> >> +#include <linux/delay.h> >> +#include <linux/err.h> >> +#include <linux/io.h> >> +#include <linux/module.h> >> +#include <linux/of.h> >> +#include <linux/of_device.h> >> +#include <linux/platform_device.h> >> +#include <linux/pwm.h> >> +#include <linux/slab.h> >> +#include <linux/spinlock.h> >> +#include <linux/time.h> >> +#include <linux/regmap.h> >> + >> +#define PWM_IRQ_ENABLE_REG 0x0000 >> +#define PCIE(ch) BIT(ch) > > Can you please align those: > #define PWM_IRQ_ENABLE_REG 0x0000 > #define PCIE(ch) BIT(ch) > > And all those below as well? Which means you might want to insert > another tab to cater for those longer symbols. yep, align it is batter :-) > >> + >> +#define PWM_IRQ_STATUS_REG 0x0004 >> +#define PIS(ch) BIT(ch) >> + >> +#define CAPTURE_IRQ_ENABLE_REG 0x0010 >> +#define CFIE(ch) BIT(ch << 1 + 1) >> +#define CRIE(ch) BIT(ch << 1) >> + >> +#define CAPTURE_IRQ_STATUS_REG 0x0014 >> +#define CFIS(ch) BIT(ch << 1 + 1) >> +#define CRIS(ch) BIT(ch << 1) >> + >> +#define CLK_CFG_REG(ch) (0x0020 + (ch >> 1) * 4) >> +#define CLK_SRC BIT(7) >> +#define CLK_SRC_BYPASS_SEC BIT(6) >> +#define CLK_SRC_BYPASS_FIR BIT(5) >> +#define CLK_GATING BIT(4) >> +#define CLK_DIV_M GENMASK(3, 0) >> + >> +#define PWM_DZ_CTR_REG(ch) (0x0030 + (ch >> 1) * 4) >> +#define PWM_DZ_INTV GENMASK(15, 8) >> +#define PWM_DZ_EN BIT(0) >> + >> +#define PWM_ENABLE_REG 0x0040 >> +#define PWM_EN(ch) BIT(ch) >> + >> +#define CAPTURE_ENABLE_REG 0x0044 >> +#define CAP_EN(ch) BIT(ch) >> + >> +#define PWM_CTR_REG(ch) (0x0060 + ch * 0x20) >> +#define PWM_PERIOD_RDY BIT(11) >> +#define PWM_PUL_START BIT(10) >> +#define PWM_MODE BIT(9) >> +#define PWM_ACT_STA BIT(8) >> +#define PWM_PRESCAL_K GENMASK(7, 0) >> + >> +#define PWM_PERIOD_REG(ch) (0x0064 + ch * 0x20) >> +#define PWM_ENTIRE_CYCLE GENMASK(31, 16) >> +#define PWM_ACT_CYCLE GENMASK(15, 0) >> + >> +#define PWM_CNT_REG(ch) (0x0068 + ch * 0x20) >> +#define PWM_CNT_VAL GENMASK(15, 0) >> + >> +#define CAPTURE_CTR_REG(ch) (0x006c + ch * 0x20) >> +#define CAPTURE_CRLF BIT(2) >> +#define CAPTURE_CFLF BIT(1) >> +#define CAPINV BIT(0) >> + >> +#define CAPTURE_RISE_REG(ch) (0x0070 + ch * 0x20) >> +#define CAPTURE_CRLR GENMASK(15, 0) >> + >> +#define CAPTURE_FALL_REG(ch) (0x0074 + ch * 0x20) >> +#define CAPTURE_CFLR GENMASK(15, 0) >> + >> +struct sun8i_pwm_data { >> + bool has_prescaler_bypass; >> + bool has_rdy; >> + unsigned int npwm; >> +}; > > I believe you don't need this structure. See below. yep, clock will output directly while bypass has been set, and equivalent to 50% duty cycles... > >> + >> +struct sun8i_pwm_chip { >> + struct pwm_chip chip; >> + struct clk *clk; >> + void __iomem *base; >> + spinlock_t ctrl_lock; >> + const struct sun8i_pwm_data *data; >> + struct regmap *regmap; >> +}; >> + >> +static const u16 div_m_table[] = { >> + 1, >> + 2, >> + 4, >> + 8, >> + 16, >> + 32, >> + 64, >> + 128, >> + 256 >> +}; > > That looks very much like: "1U << x" to me. uhmm, i think using table is more explicit and extended... > >> + >> +static inline struct sun8i_pwm_chip *to_sun8i_pwm_chip(struct pwm_chip *chip) > > No need for "inline", the compiler knows better. static is enough. okey :-) > >> +{ >> + return container_of(chip, struct sun8i_pwm_chip, chip); >> +} >> + >> +static u32 sun8i_pwm_read(struct sun8i_pwm_chip *sun8i_pwm, >> + unsigned long offset) > > Can you please align those continuation lines properly? The first > character in the new line should be aligned to the first character of > the first argument. Use tabs first, then fill up with spaces: Align it next :-) > > static u32 sun8i_pwm_read(struct sun8i_pwm_chip *sun8i_pwm, > unsigned long offset) > > This applies to the rest of the file as well. > >> +{ >> + u32 val; >> + >> + regmap_read(sun8i_pwm->regmap, offset, &val); >> + >> + return val; >> +} >> + >> +static inline void sun8i_pwm_set_bit(struct sun8i_pwm_chip *sun8i_pwm, > > no inline (for those below as well) > >> + unsigned long reg, u32 bit) >> +{ >> + regmap_update_bits(sun8i_pwm->regmap, reg, bit, bit); >> +} >> + >> +static inline void sun8i_pwm_clear_bit(struct sun8i_pwm_chip *sun8i_pwm, >> + unsigned long reg, u32 bit) >> +{ >> + regmap_update_bits(sun8i_pwm->regmap, reg, bit, 0); >> +} >> + >> +static inline void sun8i_pwm_set_value(struct sun8i_pwm_chip *sun8i_pwm, >> + unsigned long reg, u32 mask, u32 val) >> +{ >> + regmap_update_bits(sun8i_pwm->regmap, reg, mask, val); >> +} >> + >> +static void sun8i_pwm_set_polarity(struct sun8i_pwm_chip *chip, u32 ch, >> + enum pwm_polarity polarity) >> +{ >> + if (polarity == PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL) >> + sun8i_pwm_set_bit(chip, PWM_CTR_REG(ch), PWM_ACT_STA); >> + else >> + sun8i_pwm_clear_bit(chip, PWM_CTR_REG(ch), PWM_ACT_STA); >> +} >> + >> +static int sun8i_pwm_config(struct sun8i_pwm_chip *sun8i_pwm, u8 ch, >> + struct pwm_state *state) >> +{ >> + u64 clk_rate, clk_div, val; >> + u16 prescaler = 0; >> + u8 id = 0; >> + >> + clk_rate = clk_get_rate(sun8i_pwm->clk); >> + >> + if (clk_rate == 24000000) >> + sun8i_pwm_clear_bit(sun8i_pwm, CLK_CFG_REG(ch), CLK_SRC); >> + else >> + sun8i_pwm_set_bit(sun8i_pwm, CLK_CFG_REG(ch), CLK_SRC); > > This hardcoded 24MHz looks slightly dodgy and should be replaced with > some proper code to select the best matching clock, out of a number of > them given in the DT (see the DT binding mail). > Without thinking too deeply about it, I guess we try which clocks gives > the least error for the given configuration. The frequency alone might > be a good first guide. > If you can't be bothered with coding this, we might just go ahead with > the first specified clock and always use this, for now. Dose the framework support parse 2 or more clk from DT ? yep, It is better to set the clk automatically > >> + >> + if (sun8i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { > > What is this about? I think this is a misunderstanding: > The bypass bits allows to directly pass on the input clock to the output > pin, without any actual PWM properties. So if one channel is (by > chance?) configured for a 50% duty cycle and the same frequency as one > of the input clocks, you might want to use the bypass bit instead. But I > don't see many advantages in doing so, so I guess we can ignore it in a > generic PWM driver. > Anyway using some hardcoded value from the "data" structure looks just > wrong to me. I guess you can just remove this, along with the > has_prescaler_bypass variable from the sun8i_pwm_data structure. Agree to remove it. > >> + /* pwm output bypass */ >> + if (ch % 2) >> + sun8i_pwm_set_bit(sun8i_pwm, CLK_CFG_REG(ch), >> + CLK_SRC_BYPASS_FIR); >> + else >> + sun8i_pwm_set_bit(sun8i_pwm, CLK_CFG_REG(ch), >> + CLK_SRC_BYPASS_SEC); >> + return 0; >> + } >> + >> + val = state->period * clk_rate; >> + do_div(val, NSEC_PER_SEC); >> + if (val < 1) { >> + dev_err(sun8i_pwm->chip.dev, >> + "Period expects a larger value\n"); > > Alignment. > And you might want to hook in here to select a higher frequency input clock. > >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + >> + /* calculate and set prescalar, div table, pwn entrie cycle */ > > prescaler PWM entire > > though I believe this "entire cycle" term is an Allwinner invention. > Wouldn't period be a better term here, also matching the framework? It seem no... referent the manual, "entire cycle" seem means the count of prescaler_clk(divide by prescaler), you shoule multiply Tprescaler_clk, then is Tperiod. > >> + clk_div = val; >> + >> + while (clk_div > 65535) { >> + prescaler++; >> + clk_div = val; >> + do_div(clk_div, prescaler + 1); >> + do_div(clk_div, div_m_table[id]); > > 1U << id > >> + >> + if (prescaler == 255) { >> + prescaler = 0; >> + id++; >> + if (id == 9) >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> + } >> + >> + sun8i_pwm_set_value(sun8i_pwm, PWM_PERIOD_REG(ch), >> + PWM_ENTIRE_CYCLE, clk_div << 16); >> + sun8i_pwm_set_value(sun8i_pwm, PWM_CTR_REG(ch), >> + PWM_PRESCAL_K, prescaler << 0); >> + sun8i_pwm_set_value(sun8i_pwm, CLK_CFG_REG(ch), >> + CLK_DIV_M, id << 0); >> + >> + /* set duty cycle */ >> + val = (prescaler + 1) * div_m_table[id] * clk_div; > > (1U << id) > > You might want to check for the range, though. Yep :-) > >> + val = state->period; >> + do_div(val, clk_div); >> + clk_div = state->duty_cycle; >> + do_div(clk_div, val); >> + >> + sun8i_pwm_set_value(sun8i_pwm, PWM_PERIOD_REG(ch), >> + PWM_ACT_CYCLE, clk_div << 0); >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> +static int sun8i_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, >> + struct pwm_state *state) >> +{ >> + int ret; >> + struct sun8i_pwm_chip *sun8i_pwm = to_sun8i_pwm_chip(chip); >> + struct pwm_state cstate; >> + >> + pwm_get_state(pwm, &cstate); >> + if (!cstate.enabled) { >> + ret = clk_prepare_enable(sun8i_pwm->clk); >> + if (ret) { >> + dev_err(chip->dev, "Failed to enable PWM clock\n"); >> + return ret; >> + } >> + } >> + >> + spin_lock(&sun8i_pwm->ctrl_lock); >> + >> + if ((cstate.period != state->period) || >> + (cstate.duty_cycle != state->duty_cycle)) { >> + ret = sun8i_pwm_config(sun8i_pwm, pwm->hwpwm, state); >> + if (ret) { >> + spin_unlock(&sun8i_pwm->ctrl_lock); >> + dev_err(chip->dev, "Failed to config PWM\n"); >> + return ret; >> + } >> + } >> + >> + if (state->polarity != cstate.polarity) >> + sun8i_pwm_set_polarity(sun8i_pwm, pwm->hwpwm, state->polarity); >> + >> + if (state->enabled) { >> + sun8i_pwm_set_bit(sun8i_pwm, >> + CLK_CFG_REG(pwm->hwpwm), CLK_GATING); >> + >> + sun8i_pwm_set_bit(sun8i_pwm, >> + PWM_ENABLE_REG, PWM_EN(pwm->hwpwm)); >> + } else { >> + sun8i_pwm_clear_bit(sun8i_pwm, >> + CLK_CFG_REG(pwm->hwpwm), CLK_GATING); >> + >> + sun8i_pwm_clear_bit(sun8i_pwm, >> + PWM_ENABLE_REG, PWM_EN(pwm->hwpwm)); >> + } >> + >> + spin_unlock(&sun8i_pwm->ctrl_lock); >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> +static void sun8i_pwm_get_state(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, >> + struct pwm_state *state) >> +{ >> + struct sun8i_pwm_chip *sun8i_pwm = to_sun8i_pwm_chip(chip); >> + u64 clk_rate, tmp; >> + u32 val; >> + u16 clk_div, act_cycle; >> + u8 prescal, id; > > You might want to add a channel variable to increase readability: > int channel = pwm->hwpwm; > Okey >> + >> + clk_rate = clk_get_rate(sun8i_pwm->clk); >> + >> + val = sun8i_pwm_read(sun8i_pwm, PWM_CTR_REG(pwm->hwpwm)); >> + if (PWM_ACT_STA & val) >> + state->polarity = PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL; >> + else >> + state->polarity = PWM_POLARITY_INVERSED; >> + >> + prescal = PWM_PRESCAL_K & val; >> + >> + val = sun8i_pwm_read(sun8i_pwm, PWM_ENABLE_REG); >> + if (PWM_EN(pwm->hwpwm) & val) >> + state->enabled = true; >> + else >> + state->enabled = false; >> + >> + val = sun8i_pwm_read(sun8i_pwm, PWM_PERIOD_REG(pwm->hwpwm)); >> + act_cycle = PWM_ACT_CYCLE & val; >> + clk_div = val >> 16; >> + >> + val = sun8i_pwm_read(sun8i_pwm, CLK_CFG_REG(pwm->hwpwm)); >> + id = CLK_DIV_M & val; >> + >> + tmp = act_cycle * prescal * div_m_table[id] * NSEC_PER_SEC; >> + state->duty_cycle = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(tmp, clk_rate); >> + tmp = clk_div * prescal * div_m_table[id] * NSEC_PER_SEC; >> + state->period = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(tmp, clk_rate); >> +} >> + >> +static const struct regmap_config sun8i_pwm_regmap_config = { >> + .reg_bits = 32, >> + .reg_stride = 4, >> + .val_bits = 32, >> + .max_register = CAPTURE_FALL_REG(7), >> +}; >> + >> +static const struct pwm_ops sun8i_pwm_ops = { >> + .apply = sun8i_pwm_apply, >> + .get_state = sun8i_pwm_get_state, >> + .owner = THIS_MODULE, >> +}; >> + >> +static const struct sun8i_pwm_data sun8i_pwm_data_r40 = { >> + .has_prescaler_bypass = false, > > This is not needed (see my comment above). yep. > >> + .has_rdy = true, > > And this is not used. Copied from sun4i? Where it interestingly isn't > used either ;-) > >> + .npwm = 8, > > I would really love to see this being moved to the DT (see my other mail > to Thierry about the generic property). > > This would mean you don't need a SoC specific structure at all. okey. > >> +}; >> + >> +static const struct of_device_id sun8i_pwm_dt_ids[] = { >> + { >> + .compatible = "allwinner,sun8i-r40-pwm", >> + .data = &sun8i_pwm_data_r40, >> + }, >> + {}, >> +}; >> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, sun8i_pwm_dt_ids); >> + >> +static int sun8i_pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> +{ >> + struct sun8i_pwm_chip *pwm; >> + struct resource *res; >> + int ret; >> + const struct of_device_id *match; >> + >> + match = of_match_device(sun8i_pwm_dt_ids, &pdev->dev); >> + if (!match) { >> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Error: No device match found\n"); >> + return -ENODEV; >> + } >> + >> + pwm = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*pwm), GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!pwm) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0); >> + pwm->base = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res); >> + if (IS_ERR(pwm->base)) >> + return PTR_ERR(pwm->base); >> + >> + pwm->regmap = devm_regmap_init_mmio(&pdev->dev, pwm->base, >> + &sun8i_pwm_regmap_config); >> + if (IS_ERR(pwm->regmap)) { >> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to create regmap\n"); >> + return PTR_ERR(pwm->regmap); >> + } >> + >> + pwm->clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, NULL); >> + if (IS_ERR(pwm->clk)) >> + return PTR_ERR(pwm->clk); > > This would need to be extended to get multiple clocks. okey. > >> + >> + pwm->data = match->data; >> + pwm->chip.dev = &pdev->dev; >> + pwm->chip.ops = &sun8i_pwm_ops; >> + pwm->chip.base = -1; >> + pwm->chip.npwm = pwm->data->npwm; > > It should be fairly easy to initialise this from some DT property. > > That's it for the my first review round. Haven't checked the actual > algorithm and bit assignments yet. > Did you manage to test this? Sure :-) All has been tested on my T3 board (compatible V40, R40) PWM signal is work well observe from oscilloscope. > > Cheers, > Andre. > >> + pwm->chip.of_xlate = of_pwm_xlate_with_flags; >> + pwm->chip.of_pwm_n_cells = 3; >> + >> + spin_lock_init(&pwm->ctrl_lock); >> + >> + ret = pwmchip_add(&pwm->chip); >> + if (ret < 0) { >> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to add PWM chip: %d\n", ret); >> + return ret; >> + } >> + >> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, pwm); >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> +static int sun8i_pwm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) >> +{ >> + struct sun8i_pwm_chip *pwm = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); >> + >> + return pwmchip_remove(&pwm->chip); >> +} >> + >> +static struct platform_driver sun8i_pwm_driver = { >> + .driver = { >> + .name = "sun8i-pwm", >> + .of_match_table = sun8i_pwm_dt_ids, >> + }, >> + .probe = sun8i_pwm_probe, >> + .remove = sun8i_pwm_remove, >> +}; >> +module_platform_driver(sun8i_pwm_driver); >> + >> +MODULE_ALIAS("platform: sun8i-pwm"); >> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Hao Zhang <hao5781286@xxxxxxxxx>"); >> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Allwinner sun8i PWM driver"); >> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2"); >> > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html