[PATCH 0/2] Change PWM-controlled LED pin active mode and algorithm
Nylon Chen
nylon.chen at sifive.com
Tue Jan 17 18:32:25 PST 2023
Conor Dooley <conor at kernel.org> 於 2023年1月14日 週六 下午10:00寫道:
>
> Hi Jess!
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 07:24:56PM +0000, Jessica Clarke wrote:
> > On 13 Jan 2023, at 18:32, Conor Dooley <conor at kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
>
> > > Please run scripts/get_maintainer.pl before sending patches, you missed
> > > both me & the PWM maintainers unfortunately!
> > > AFAIK, the PWM maintainers use patchwork, so you will probably have to
> > > resend this patchset so that it is on their radar.
> > > I've marked the series as "Changes Requested" on the RISC-V one.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 04:31:13PM +0800, Nylon Chen wrote:
> > >
> > >> According to the circuit diagram of User LEDs - RGB described in the
> > >> manual hifive-unmatched-schematics-v3.pdf[0].
> > >> The behavior of PWM is acitve-high.
> > >>
> > >> According to the descriptionof PWM for pwmcmp in SiFive FU740-C000
> > >> Manual[1].
> > >> The pwm algorithm is (PW) pulse active time = (D) duty * (T) period[2].
> > >> The `frac` variable is pulse "inactive" time so we need to invert it.
> > >>
> > >> So this patchset removes active-low in DTS and adds reverse logic to
> > >> the driver.
> > >>
> > >> [0]:https://sifive-china.oss-cn-zhangjiakou.aliyuncs.com/HiFIve%20Unmatched/hifive-unmatched-schematics-v3.pdf
> > >> [1]:https://sifive-china.oss-cn-zhangjiakou.aliyuncs.com/HiFIve%20Unmatched/fu740-c000-manual-v1p2.pdf
> > >> [2]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_cycle
> > >
> > > Please delete link 2, convert the other two to standard Link: tags and
> > > put this information in the dts patch. Possibly into the PWM patch too,
> > > depending on what the PWM maintainers think.
> > > This info should be in the commit history IMO and the commit message for
> > > the dts patch says what's obvious from the diff without any explanation
> > > as to why.
> > >
> > > I did a bit of looking around on lore, to see if I could figure out
> > > why it was done like this in the first place, and I found:
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pwm/CAJ2_jOG2M03aLBgUOgGjWH9CUxq2aTG97eSX70=UaSbGCMMF_g@mail.gmail.com/
> >
> > That DTS documentation makes no sense to me, why does what the LED is
> > wired to matter?
>
> ```
> active-low:
> description:
> For PWMs where the LED is wired to supply rather than ground.
> ```
>
> > Whether you have your transistor next to ground or
> > next to Vdd doesn’t matter, what matters is whether the transistor is
> > on or off. Maybe what they mean is whether the *PWM's output* / *the
> > transistor's input* is pulled to ground or Vdd? In which case the
> > property would indeed not apply here.
> >
> > Unless that’s written assuming the LED is wired directly to the PWM, in
> > which case it would make sense, but that’s a very narrow-minded view of
> > what the PWM output is (directly) driving.
>
> I would suspect that it was written with that assumption.
> Probably was the case on the specific board this property was originally
> added for.
>
Hi Conor
As you can see, there is also the same description in U-Boot.
But in U-Boot, the DTS of Unmatched/Unleashed has not been added active-low.
This is because active-high should be correct if we look at the circuit diagram.
> Maybe it'd be a bit more foolproof written as "For LEDs that are
> illuminated while the PWM output is low. For example, where an LED is
> wired between supply and the PWM output."?
>
More information about the linux-riscv
mailing list