[PATCH 0/4] pwm: omap-dmtimer: fix period/duty_cycle calculation
David Rivshin (Allworx)
drivshin.allworx at gmail.com
Fri Mar 4 08:27:36 PST 2016
On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 16:19:48 +0100
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 08:31:00PM -0500, David Rivshin (Allworx) wrote:
> > On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 23:26:50 -0500
> > "David Rivshin (Allworx)" <drivshin.allworx at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > From: David Rivshin <drivshin at allworx.com>
> > >
> > > When using a short PWM period (approaching the min of 2/clk_rate),
> > > pwm-omap-dmtimer does not produce accurate results. In the worst case a
> > > requested period of 2/clk_rate would result in a real period of 4/clk_rate
> > > instead. This is a series includes a fix for that problem, as well as
> > > other related improvements, and is based on the current linux-pwm/for-next
> > > tip.
> > >
> > > I have tested on a Sitara AM335x platform, using a scope to verify the
> > > output with a variety of periods and duty cycles. This includes a PWM
> > > rate up clk_rate/2 with 50% duty cycle (e.g. generating fclk/2) with
> > > both 32768Hz and 24MHz fclks. I do not have an OMAP4 board to test with,
> > > although appropriate sections in the the reference manuals appear
> > > substantially the same, so I believe the changes are equally correct
> > > there.
> > >
> > > Note that the OMAP4 TRMs do effectively state that the maximum PWM
> > > rate is clk_rate/4, so at very fast PWM rates the behavior may not be
> > > as reliable as I observed with Sitara. Although I suspect that it's
> > > the same module and will also work, at least under some circumstances.
> > > If anyone with OMAP4 hardware and a scope is so inclined, I would be
> > > curious to know the results.
> > >
> > > David Rivshin (4):
> > > pwm: omap-dmtimer: fix inaccurate period/duty_cycle calculation
> > > pwm: omap-dmtimer: add sanity checking for load and match values
> > > pwm: omap-dmtimer: round load and match values rather than truncate
> > > pwm: omap-dmtimer: add dev_dbg() message for effective period and duty
> > > cycle
> > >
> > > drivers/pwm/pwm-omap-dmtimer.c | 71 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> > > 1 file changed, 55 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> > >
> > Hi Thierry,
> > Gentle ping. It does not look like you've taken this series, and I
> > wanted to make sure you're not waiting on something from me. It would
> > be nice to get at least the first patch into 4.5, if possible.
> I've applied patches 1 and 3, and I'm planning on sending out a pull
> request for inclusion in v4.5-rc7 later on.
> Patches 2 and 4 didn't seem ready/critical, so let's finish those up
> for v4.6-rc1.
I know there was a lot of discussion on 4, but I'm not sure what the
concern is on patch 2. Is there something specific you're thinking of?
FYI, I know that Adam Ford is using this driver as the backend for
a pwm-backlight control. Without patch 2 this driver will not configure
the HW in a legal way at 0 or 100% duty cycle. However, I forget what
the practical effect of that is, and Adam seemed to indicate it was OK
for his purposes.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel