Hello,
On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 05:29:29PM +0900, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote:
> -static int rcar_pwm_set_counter(struct rcar_pwm_chip *rp, int div, int duty_ns,
> - int period_ns)
> +static void rcar_pwm_calc_counter(struct rcar_pwm_chip *rp, int div,
> + int duty_ns, int period_ns)
> {
> unsigned long long one_cycle, tmp; /* 0.01 nanoseconds */
> unsigned long clk_rate = clk_get_rate(rp->clk);
> @@ -120,11 +121,17 @@ static int rcar_pwm_set_counter(struct rcar_pwm_chip *rp, int div, int duty_ns,
> do_div(tmp, one_cycle);
> ph = tmp & RCAR_PWMCNT_PH0_MASK;
>
> + rp->pwmcnt = cyc | ph;
Wouldn't it be more natural to let rcar_pwm_calc_counter return cyc | ph
and then ...
> +}
> +
> +static int rcar_pwm_set_counter(struct rcar_pwm_chip *rp)
> +{
> /* Avoid prohibited setting */
> - if (cyc == 0 || ph == 0)
> + if ((rp->pwmcnt & RCAR_PWMCNT_CYC0_MASK) == 0 ||
> + (rp->pwmcnt & RCAR_PWMCNT_PH0_MASK) == 0)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - rcar_pwm_write(rp, cyc | ph, RCAR_PWMCNT);
> + rcar_pwm_write(rp, rp->pwmcnt, RCAR_PWMCNT);
>
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -159,7 +166,8 @@ static int rcar_pwm_config(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
>
> rcar_pwm_update(rp, RCAR_PWMCR_SYNC, RCAR_PWMCR_SYNC, RCAR_PWMCR);
>
> - ret = rcar_pwm_set_counter(rp, div, duty_ns, period_ns);
> + rcar_pwm_calc_counter(rp, div, duty_ns, period_ns);
> + ret = rcar_pwm_set_counter(rp);
> if (!ret)
> rcar_pwm_set_clock_control(rp, div);
... pass this value to rcar_pwm_set_counter as u32. (Or pass div,
duty_ns and period_ns to rcar_pwm_set_counter and let this then call
rcar_pwm_calc_counter. Then you don't need a new member in the struct
rcar_pwm_chip.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
