[PATCH v2 3/5] pwm: imx27: reset the PWM if it is not running
Marco Felsch
m.felsch at pengutronix.de
Mon Sep 28 05:29:48 EDT 2020
On 20-09-28 09:30, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:53:28PM +0200, Marco Felsch wrote:
> > Trigger a software reset during probe to clear the FIFO and reset the
> > register values to their default. According the datasheet the DBGEN,
> > STOPEN, DOZEN and WAITEN bits should be untouched by the software reset
> > but this is not the case.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch <m.felsch at pengutronix.de>
> > ---
> > v2:
> > - new patch
> >
> > drivers/pwm/pwm-imx27.c | 26 ++++++++++++++------------
> > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx27.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx27.c
> > index b761764b8375..3b6bcd8d58b7 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx27.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx27.c
> > @@ -183,10 +183,8 @@ static void pwm_imx27_get_state(struct pwm_chip *chip,
> > pwm_imx27_clk_disable_unprepare(imx);
> > }
> >
> > -static void pwm_imx27_sw_reset(struct pwm_chip *chip)
> > +static void pwm_imx27_sw_reset(struct pwm_imx27_chip *imx, struct device *dev)
> > {
> > - struct pwm_imx27_chip *imx = to_pwm_imx27_chip(chip);
> > - struct device *dev = chip->dev;
> > int wait_count = 0;
> > u32 cr;
>
> This is an unrelated hunk that I don't expect to result in any changes
> in the code. If you consider it better this way, you should at least
> mention it in the commit log.
IMO this is required due to the usage from the probe. I'm not a fan of
passing the 'struct pwm_chip' before initializing it. So it is not
unrelated. I will mention it in v3.
>
> > @@ -266,7 +264,7 @@ static int pwm_imx27_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
> > if (imx->enabled)
> > pwm_imx27_wait_fifo_slot(chip, pwm);
> > else
> > - pwm_imx27_sw_reset(chip);
> > + pwm_imx27_sw_reset(imx, chip->dev);
> >
> > writel(duty_cycles, imx->mmio_base + MX3_PWMSAR);
> > writel(period_cycles, imx->mmio_base + MX3_PWMPR);
> > @@ -370,19 +368,23 @@ static int pwm_imx27_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > if (ret)
> > return ret;
> >
> > - mask = MX3_PWMCR_STOPEN | MX3_PWMCR_DOZEN | MX3_PWMCR_WAITEN |
> > - MX3_PWMCR_DBGEN;
> > - pwmcr = MX3_PWMCR_STOPEN | MX3_PWMCR_DOZEN | MX3_PWMCR_WAITEN |
> > - MX3_PWMCR_DBGEN;
> > - pwm_imx27_update_bits(imx->mmio_base + MX3_PWMCR, mask, pwmcr);
> > -
> > /* keep clks on and clk settings unchanged if pwm is running */
> > pwmcr = readl(imx->mmio_base + MX3_PWMCR);
> > if (!(pwmcr & MX3_PWMCR_EN)) {
> > - mask = MX3_PWMCR_CLKSRC;
> > - pwmcr = FIELD_PREP(MX3_PWMCR_CLKSRC, MX3_PWMCR_CLKSRC_IPG_HIGH);
> > + pwm_imx27_sw_reset(imx, &pdev->dev);
> > + mask = MX3_PWMCR_STOPEN | MX3_PWMCR_DOZEN | MX3_PWMCR_WAITEN |
> > + MX3_PWMCR_DBGEN | MX3_PWMCR_CLKSRC;
> > + pwmcr = MX3_PWMCR_STOPEN | MX3_PWMCR_DOZEN | MX3_PWMCR_WAITEN |
> > + MX3_PWMCR_DBGEN |
> > + FIELD_PREP(MX3_PWMCR_CLKSRC, MX3_PWMCR_CLKSRC_IPG_HIGH);
> > pwm_imx27_update_bits(imx->mmio_base + MX3_PWMCR, mask, pwmcr);
> > pwm_imx27_clk_disable_unprepare(imx);
> > + } else {
> > + mask = MX3_PWMCR_STOPEN | MX3_PWMCR_DOZEN | MX3_PWMCR_WAITEN |
> > + MX3_PWMCR_DBGEN;
> > + pwmcr = MX3_PWMCR_STOPEN | MX3_PWMCR_DOZEN | MX3_PWMCR_WAITEN |
> > + MX3_PWMCR_DBGEN;
> > + pwm_imx27_update_bits(imx->mmio_base + MX3_PWMCR, mask, pwmcr);
> > }
>
> IMHO this is worse than the stuff I suggested for one of the earlier
> patches because there is much repetition. I'd put
>
> mask = MX3_PWMCR_STOPEN | MX3_PWMCR_DOZEN | MX3_PWMCR_WAITEN | MX3_PWMCR_DBGEN;
> value = MX3_PWMCR_STOPEN | MX3_PWMCR_DOZEN | MX3_PWMCR_WAITEN | MX3_PWMCR_DBGEN;
>
> before the if and just modify as necessary in the first branch of the
> if.
I've changed the behaviour in v3.
Regards,
Marco
>
> Best regards
> Uwe
>
> --
> Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
> Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list