Intel-GFX Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org,
	intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	"Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>,
	"Mika Westerberg" <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
	"Len Brown" <lenb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 05/16] pwm: lpss: Add pwm_lpss_prepare_enable() helper
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 21:45:53 +0300
Message-ID: <20200728184553.GZ3703480@smile.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200717133753.127282-6-hdegoede@redhat.com>

On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 03:37:42PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> In the not-enabled -> enabled path pwm_lpss_apply() needs to get a
> runtime-pm reference; and then on any errors it needs to release it
> again.
> 
> This leads to somewhat hard to read code. This commit introduces a new
> pwm_lpss_prepare_enable() helper and moves all the steps necessary for
> the not-enabled -> enabled transition there, so that we can error check
> the entire transition in a single place and only have one pm_runtime_put()
> on failure call site.
> 
> While working on this I noticed that the enabled -> enabled (update
> settings) path was quite similar, so I've added an enable parameter to
> the new pwm_lpss_prepare_enable() helper, which allows using it in that
> path too.

Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
But see below.

> Suggested-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
> ---
>  drivers/pwm/pwm-lpss.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-lpss.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-lpss.c
> index da9bc3d10104..8a136ba2a583 100644
> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-lpss.c
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-lpss.c
> @@ -122,41 +122,48 @@ static inline void pwm_lpss_cond_enable(struct pwm_device *pwm, bool cond)
>  		pwm_lpss_write(pwm, pwm_lpss_read(pwm) | PWM_ENABLE);
>  }
>  
> +static int pwm_lpss_prepare_enable(struct pwm_lpss_chip *lpwm,
> +				   struct pwm_device *pwm,
> +				   const struct pwm_state *state,
> +				   bool enable)
> +{
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = pwm_lpss_is_updating(pwm);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	pwm_lpss_prepare(lpwm, pwm, state->duty_cycle, state->period);
> +	pwm_lpss_cond_enable(pwm, enable && lpwm->info->bypass == false);
> +	ret = pwm_lpss_wait_for_update(pwm);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	pwm_lpss_cond_enable(pwm, enable && lpwm->info->bypass == true);
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>  static int pwm_lpss_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
>  			  const struct pwm_state *state)
>  {
>  	struct pwm_lpss_chip *lpwm = to_lpwm(chip);
> -	int ret;

> +	int ret = 0;

We can avoid this change...

>  	if (state->enabled) {
>  		if (!pwm_is_enabled(pwm)) {
>  			pm_runtime_get_sync(chip->dev);
> -			ret = pwm_lpss_is_updating(pwm);
> -			if (ret) {
> -				pm_runtime_put(chip->dev);
> -				return ret;
> -			}
> -			pwm_lpss_prepare(lpwm, pwm, state->duty_cycle, state->period);
> -			pwm_lpss_cond_enable(pwm, lpwm->info->bypass == false);
> -			ret = pwm_lpss_wait_for_update(pwm);
> -			if (ret) {
> +			ret = pwm_lpss_prepare_enable(lpwm, pwm, state, true);
> +			if (ret)
>  				pm_runtime_put(chip->dev);
> -				return ret;
> -			}
> -			pwm_lpss_cond_enable(pwm, lpwm->info->bypass == true);
>  		} else {
> -			ret = pwm_lpss_is_updating(pwm);
> -			if (ret)
> -				return ret;
> -			pwm_lpss_prepare(lpwm, pwm, state->duty_cycle, state->period);
> -			return pwm_lpss_wait_for_update(pwm);

> +			ret = pwm_lpss_prepare_enable(lpwm, pwm, state, false);

...by simple return directly from here. But I admit I haven't seen the next patch yet.

>  		}
>  	} else if (pwm_is_enabled(pwm)) {
>  		pwm_lpss_write(pwm, pwm_lpss_read(pwm) & ~PWM_ENABLE);
>  		pm_runtime_put(chip->dev);
>  	}
>  
> -	return 0;
> +	return ret;
>  }
>  
>  static void pwm_lpss_get_state(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
> -- 
> 2.26.2
> 

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko


_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

  reply index

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-17 13:37 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 00/16] acpi/pwm/i915: Convert pwm-crc and i915 driver's PWM code to use the atomic PWM API Hans de Goede
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 01/16] ACPI / LPSS: Resume Cherry Trail PWM controller in no-irq phase Hans de Goede
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 02/16] ACPI / LPSS: Save Cherry Trail PWM ctx registers only once (at activation) Hans de Goede
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 03/16] pwm: lpss: Fix off by one error in base_unit math in pwm_lpss_prepare() Hans de Goede
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 04/16] pwm: lpss: Add range limit check for the base_unit register value Hans de Goede
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 05/16] pwm: lpss: Add pwm_lpss_prepare_enable() helper Hans de Goede
2020-07-28 18:45   ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2020-07-28 19:49     ` Hans de Goede
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 06/16] pwm: lpss: Use pwm_lpss_apply() when restoring state on resume Hans de Goede
2020-07-28 18:57   ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-07-28 19:55     ` Hans de Goede
2020-07-29  8:12       ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-08-02 20:51         ` Hans de Goede
2020-08-03  8:41           ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 07/16] pwm: crc: Fix period / duty_cycle times being off by a factor of 256 Hans de Goede
2020-07-28 19:36   ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-07-28 20:00     ` Hans de Goede
2020-07-29  8:13   ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 08/16] pwm: crc: Fix off-by-one error in the clock-divider calculations Hans de Goede
2020-07-29 10:28   ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 09/16] pwm: crc: Fix period changes not having any effect Hans de Goede
2020-07-29 10:30   ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 10/16] pwm: crc: Enable/disable PWM output on enable/disable Hans de Goede
2020-07-29 10:32   ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 11/16] pwm: crc: Implement apply() method to support the new atomic PWM API Hans de Goede
2020-07-29 10:51   ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 12/16] pwm: crc: Implement get_state() method Hans de Goede
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 13/16] drm/i915: panel: Add get_vbt_pwm_freq() helper Hans de Goede
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 14/16] drm/i915: panel: Honor the VBT PWM frequency for devs with an external PWM controller Hans de Goede
2020-07-17 13:44 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 15/16] drm/i915: panel: Honor the VBT PWM min setting " Hans de Goede
2020-07-17 13:44   ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 16/16] drm/i915: panel: Use atomic PWM API " Hans de Goede
2020-07-27  7:41 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 00/16] acpi/pwm/i915: Convert pwm-crc and i915 driver's PWM code to use the atomic PWM API Thierry Reding
2020-07-29  8:23   ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-07-29  9:32     ` Hans de Goede
2020-07-30  9:26       ` Thierry Reding
2020-08-01 14:33         ` Hans de Goede
2020-07-29 10:54 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-08-01 14:38   ` Hans de Goede
2020-08-02 11:25     ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-08-02 19:43       ` Hans de Goede

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200728184553.GZ3703480@smile.fi.intel.com \
    --to=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Intel-GFX Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/intel-gfx/0 intel-gfx/git/0.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/intel-gfx/1 intel-gfx/git/1.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 intel-gfx intel-gfx/ https://lore.kernel.org/intel-gfx \
		intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
	public-inbox-index intel-gfx

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.freedesktop.lists.intel-gfx


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git