From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: thierry.reding@gmail.com (Thierry Reding) Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 17:43:02 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v3 12/14] regulator: pwm: Retrieve correct voltage In-Reply-To: <1465895602-31008-13-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> References: <1465895602-31008-1-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> <1465895602-31008-13-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <20160708154302.GC1151@ulmo.ba.sec> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 11:13:20AM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > The continuous PWM voltage regulator is caching the voltage value in > the ->volt_uV field. While most of the time this value should reflect the > real voltage, sometime it can be sightly different if the PWM device > rounded the set_duty_cycle request. > Moreover, this value is not valid until someone has modified the regulator > output. > > Remove the ->volt_uV field and always rely on the PWM state to calculate > the regulator output. > > Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon > Reviewed-by: Brian Norris > Tested-by: Brian Norris > Tested-by: Heiko Stuebner > --- > Mark, > > I know you already added your Tested-by/Acked-by tags on this patch > but this version has slightly change and is now making use of the > pwm_get_relative_duty_cycle() helper instead of manually converting > the absolute duty_cycle value into a relative one. > --- > drivers/regulator/pwm-regulator.c | 12 ++++++------ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/regulator/pwm-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/pwm-regulator.c > index 2000118..80d083f 100644 > --- a/drivers/regulator/pwm-regulator.c > +++ b/drivers/regulator/pwm-regulator.c > @@ -35,9 +35,6 @@ struct pwm_regulator_data { > struct regulator_ops ops; > > int state; > - > - /* Continuous voltage */ > - int volt_uV; > }; > > struct pwm_voltages { > @@ -135,8 +132,13 @@ static int pwm_regulator_is_enabled(struct regulator_dev *dev) > static int pwm_regulator_get_voltage(struct regulator_dev *rdev) > { > struct pwm_regulator_data *drvdata = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev); > + int min_uV = rdev->constraints->min_uV; > + int diff = rdev->constraints->max_uV - min_uV; > + struct pwm_state pstate; > > - return drvdata->volt_uV; > + pwm_get_state(drvdata->pwm, &pstate); > + > + return min_uV + pwm_get_relative_duty_cycle(&pstate, diff); > } > > static int pwm_regulator_set_voltage(struct regulator_dev *rdev, > @@ -162,8 +164,6 @@ static int pwm_regulator_set_voltage(struct regulator_dev *rdev, > return ret; > } > > - drvdata->volt_uV = min_uV; > - > /* Delay required by PWM regulator to settle to the new voltage */ > usleep_range(ramp_delay, ramp_delay + 1000); > This hunk has a minor conflict with the regulator tree and the commit 830583004e61 ("regulator: pwm: Drop unneeded pwm_enable() call") that it contains. Mark, do you want me to provide a stable branch with the PWM regulator patches and resolve that conflict in your tree? Or would you rather take the whole set based on a stable branch from the PWM tree? Or maybe yet another possibility would be to base the PWM tree on a stable branch from the regulator tree containing the above commit. Or we can let Linus sort out the conflict, it's really quite trivial. Thierry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: