Linux-ACPI Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
To: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Cc: "Andy Shevchenko" <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
	"Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>,
	"Jani Nikula" <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
	"Joonas Lahtinen" <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>,
	"Rodrigo Vivi" <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
	"Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	"Len Brown" <lenb@kernel.org>,
	linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org,
	intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	"Mika Westerberg" <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
	linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/16] acpi/pwm/i915: Convert pwm-crc and i915 driver's PWM code to use the atomic PWM API
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 11:26:50 +0200
Message-ID: <20200730092650.GA4077384@ulmo> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b87c535a-022f-2894-1e38-5be035c6fbfc@redhat.com>


[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4378 bytes --]

On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 11:32:28AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> cHi,
> 
> On 7/29/20 10:23 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 09:41:20AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 03:37:37PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > 
> > > I've applied patches 3 through 12 to the PWM tree. I thought it was a
> > > bit odd that only a handful of these patches had been reviewed and there
> > > were no Tested-bys, but I'm going to trust that you know what you're
> > > doing. =) If this breaks things for anyone I'm sure they'll complain.
> 
> Thank you for picking up these patches, but ...
> 
> > Can we postpone a bit?
> 
> I have to agree with Andy here, as mentioned my plan was to push the
> entire series through drm-intel-next-queued once the last few PWM
> patches are reviewed.
> 
> There are some fixes, to the pwm-crc driver which change behavior in
> a possibly undesirable way, unless combined with the i915 changes.
> 
> E.g. there is a fix which makes the pwm-crc driver actually honor
> the requested output frequency (it was not doing this due to a bug)
> and before the i915 changes, the i915 driver was hardcoding an output
> freq, rather then looking at the video-bios-tables as it should.
> 
> So having just the pwm-crc fix, will change the output frequency
> which some LCD panels might not like.
> 
> Note things are probably fine with the hardcoded output freq, but I
> would like to play it safe here.
> 
> Also Andy was still reviewing some of the PWM patches, and has requested
> changes to 1 patch, nothing functional just some code-reshuffling for
> cleaner code, so we could alternatively fix this up with a follow-up patch.
> 
> Either way please let us know how you want to proceed.

Okay, that's fine, I'll drop them again.

> > > That said I see that Rafael has acked patches 1-2 and Jani did so for
> > > patches 13-16. I'm not sure if you expect me to pick those patches up as
> > > well. As far as I can tell the ACPI, PWM and DRM parts are all
> > > independent, so these patches could be applied to the corresponding
> > > subsystem trees.
> > > 
> > > Anyway, if you want me to pick those all up into the PWM tree, I suppose
> > > that's something I can do as well.
> 
> drm-intel-next-queued is usually seeing quite a bit of churn, so the i915
> patches really should go upstream through that branch.

During my build tests I ran into a small issue caused by this series
interacting with the conversion of period and duty-cycle to u64 that
I've queued for v5.9. This causes a build failure on x86.

I have this local diff to fix that:

--- >8 ---
diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-crc.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-crc.c
index 370ab826a20b..92e838797733 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-crc.c
+++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-crc.c
@@ -76,7 +76,9 @@ static int crc_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
 
 	if (pwm_get_duty_cycle(pwm) != state->duty_cycle ||
 	    pwm_get_period(pwm) != state->period) {
-		int level = state->duty_cycle * PWM_MAX_LEVEL / state->period;
+		u64 level = state->duty_cycle * PWM_MAX_LEVEL;
+
+		do_div(level, state->period);
 
 		err = regmap_write(crc_pwm->regmap, PWM0_DUTY_CYCLE, level);
 		if (err) {
@@ -141,10 +143,9 @@ static void crc_pwm_get_state(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
 
 	clk_div = (clk_div_reg & ~PWM_OUTPUT_ENABLE) + 1;
 
-	state->period =
-		DIV_ROUND_UP(clk_div * NSEC_PER_USEC * 256, PWM_BASE_CLK_MHZ);
-	state->duty_cycle =
-		DIV_ROUND_UP(duty_cycle_reg * state->period, PWM_MAX_LEVEL);
+	state->period = DIV_ROUND_UP(clk_div * NSEC_PER_USEC * 256, PWM_BASE_CLK_MHZ);
+	state->duty_cycle = duty_cycle_reg * state->period + PWM_MAX_LEVEL - 1;
+	do_div(state->duty_cycle, PWM_MAX_LEVEL);
 	state->polarity = PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL;
 	state->enabled = !!(clk_div_reg & PWM_OUTPUT_ENABLE);
 }
--- >8 ---

So perhaps you want to integrate that or something equivalent into your
series.

Also this could result in a tricky dependency between PWM and drm-misc,
although if you're targetting drm-misc it's too late for v5.9 anyway. In
that case you should be able to rebase your series on v5.9-rc1 when it's
out and then you'll get the prerequisite PWM changes for the u64
conversion as part of that. No need to track the dependency explicitly.

Thierry

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

  reply index

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-17 13:37 Hans de Goede
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [PATCH v5 01/16] ACPI / LPSS: Resume Cherry Trail PWM controller in no-irq phase Hans de Goede
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [PATCH v5 02/16] ACPI / LPSS: Save Cherry Trail PWM ctx registers only once (at activation) Hans de Goede
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [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 ` [PATCH v5 04/16] pwm: lpss: Add range limit check for the base_unit register value Hans de Goede
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [PATCH v5 05/16] pwm: lpss: Add pwm_lpss_prepare_enable() helper Hans de Goede
2020-07-28 18:45   ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-07-28 19:49     ` Hans de Goede
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [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 ` [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 ` [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 ` [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 ` [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 ` [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 ` [PATCH v5 12/16] pwm: crc: Implement get_state() method Hans de Goede
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [PATCH v5 13/16] drm/i915: panel: Add get_vbt_pwm_freq() helper Hans de Goede
2020-07-17 13:37 ` [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 ` [PATCH v5 15/16] drm/i915: panel: Honor the VBT PWM min setting " Hans de Goede
2020-07-17 13:44   ` [PATCH v5 16/16] drm/i915: panel: Use atomic PWM API " Hans de Goede
2020-07-27  7:41 ` [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 [this message]
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=20200730092650.GA4077384@ulmo \
    --to=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
    --cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
    --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=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
    --cc=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
    /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

Linux-ACPI Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/0 linux-acpi/git/0.git

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

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-acpi


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