* [PATCH v3] pwm: iqs620a: Fix overflow and optimize calculations
@ 2021-01-14 21:50 Uwe Kleine-König
2021-01-15 4:07 ` Jeff LaBundy
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Uwe Kleine-König @ 2021-01-14 21:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff LaBundy, Thierry Reding; +Cc: linux-pwm, Lee Jones, kernel
If state->duty_cycle is 0x100000000000000, the previous calculation of
duty_scale overflows and yields a duty cycle ratio of 0% instead of
100%. Fix this by clamping the requested duty cycle to the maximal
possible duty cycle first. This way it is possible to use a native
integer division instead of a (depending on the architecture) more
expensive 64bit division.
With this change in place duty_scale cannot be bigger than 256 which
allows to simplify the calculation of duty_val.
Fixes: 6f0841a8197b ("pwm: Add support for Azoteq IQS620A PWM generator")
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
---
drivers/pwm/pwm-iqs620a.c | 9 ++++++---
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-iqs620a.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-iqs620a.c
index 5ede8255926e..eb03f60c5db8 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-iqs620a.c
+++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-iqs620a.c
@@ -46,7 +46,9 @@ static int iqs620_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
{
struct iqs620_pwm_private *iqs620_pwm;
struct iqs62x_core *iqs62x;
- u64 duty_scale;
+ unsigned duty_cycle;
+ unsigned duty_scale;
+
int ret;
if (state->polarity != PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL)
@@ -70,7 +72,8 @@ static int iqs620_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
* For lower duty cycles (e.g. 0), the PWM output is simply disabled to
* allow an external pull-down resistor to hold the GPIO3/LTX pin low.
*/
- duty_scale = div_u64(state->duty_cycle * 256, IQS620_PWM_PERIOD_NS);
+ duty_cycle = min_t(u64, state->duty_cycle, IQS620_PWM_PERIOD_NS);
+ duty_scale = duty_cycle * 256 / IQS620_PWM_PERIOD_NS;
mutex_lock(&iqs620_pwm->lock);
@@ -82,7 +85,7 @@ static int iqs620_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
}
if (duty_scale) {
- u8 duty_val = min_t(u64, duty_scale - 1, 0xff);
+ u8 duty_val = duty_scale - 1;
ret = regmap_write(iqs62x->regmap, IQS620_PWM_DUTY_CYCLE,
duty_val);
--
2.29.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3] pwm: iqs620a: Fix overflow and optimize calculations
2021-01-14 21:50 [PATCH v3] pwm: iqs620a: Fix overflow and optimize calculations Uwe Kleine-König
@ 2021-01-15 4:07 ` Jeff LaBundy
2021-01-15 7:32 ` [PATCH v4] " Uwe Kleine-König
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jeff LaBundy @ 2021-01-15 4:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Uwe Kleine-König; +Cc: Thierry Reding, linux-pwm, Lee Jones, kernel
Hi Uwe,
Thank you for your work here; it's coming together quite nicely.
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:50:26PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> If state->duty_cycle is 0x100000000000000, the previous calculation of
> duty_scale overflows and yields a duty cycle ratio of 0% instead of
> 100%. Fix this by clamping the requested duty cycle to the maximal
> possible duty cycle first. This way it is possible to use a native
> integer division instead of a (depending on the architecture) more
> expensive 64bit division.
>
> With this change in place duty_scale cannot be bigger than 256 which
> allows to simplify the calculation of duty_val.
>
> Fixes: 6f0841a8197b ("pwm: Add support for Azoteq IQS620A PWM generator")
> Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
> ---
> drivers/pwm/pwm-iqs620a.c | 9 ++++++---
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-iqs620a.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-iqs620a.c
> index 5ede8255926e..eb03f60c5db8 100644
> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-iqs620a.c
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-iqs620a.c
> @@ -46,7 +46,9 @@ static int iqs620_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
> {
> struct iqs620_pwm_private *iqs620_pwm;
> struct iqs62x_core *iqs62x;
> - u64 duty_scale;
> + unsigned duty_cycle;
> + unsigned duty_scale;
> +
> int ret;
>
Nit: there is a rogue newline here. I'm also not such a fan of mixing
shorthand 'unsigned' with existing 'unsigned int' (as in probe).
> if (state->polarity != PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL)
> @@ -70,7 +72,8 @@ static int iqs620_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
> * For lower duty cycles (e.g. 0), the PWM output is simply disabled to
> * allow an external pull-down resistor to hold the GPIO3/LTX pin low.
> */
> - duty_scale = div_u64(state->duty_cycle * 256, IQS620_PWM_PERIOD_NS);
> + duty_cycle = min_t(u64, state->duty_cycle, IQS620_PWM_PERIOD_NS);
> + duty_scale = duty_cycle * 256 / IQS620_PWM_PERIOD_NS;
>
> mutex_lock(&iqs620_pwm->lock);
>
> @@ -82,7 +85,7 @@ static int iqs620_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
> }
>
> if (duty_scale) {
> - u8 duty_val = min_t(u64, duty_scale - 1, 0xff);
> + u8 duty_val = duty_scale - 1;
>
> ret = regmap_write(iqs62x->regmap, IQS620_PWM_DUTY_CYCLE,
> duty_val);
> --
> 2.29.2
>
That being said, the patch is functionally correct and I validated all
corner cases with actual hardware. Feel free to add to future cosmetic
revisions:
Tested-by: Jeff LaBundy <jeff@labundy.com>
Kind regards,
Jeff LaBundy
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v4] pwm: iqs620a: Fix overflow and optimize calculations
2021-01-15 4:07 ` Jeff LaBundy
@ 2021-01-15 7:32 ` Uwe Kleine-König
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Uwe Kleine-König @ 2021-01-15 7:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff LaBundy; +Cc: linux-pwm, Thierry Reding, Lee Jones, kernel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3365 bytes --]
If state->duty_cycle is 0x100000000000000, the previous calculation of
duty_scale overflows and yields a duty cycle ratio of 0% instead of
100%. Fix this by clamping the requested duty cycle to the maximal
possible duty cycle first. This way it is possible to use a native
integer division instead of a (depending on the architecture) more
expensive 64bit division.
With this change in place duty_scale cannot be bigger than 256 which
allows to simplify the calculation of duty_val.
Fixes: 6f0841a8197b ("pwm: Add support for Azoteq IQS620A PWM generator")
Tested-by: Jeff LaBundy <jeff@labundy.com>
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
---
Hi Jeff,
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:07:20PM -0600, Jeff LaBundy wrote:
> Thank you for your work here; it's coming together quite nicely.
Thank you for your prompt feedback, it adds much to the fun to be able
to rely on someone who cares and looks into patches.
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:50:26PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > struct iqs620_pwm_private *iqs620_pwm;
> > struct iqs62x_core *iqs62x;
> > - u64 duty_scale;
> > + unsigned duty_cycle;
> > + unsigned duty_scale;
> > +
> > int ret;
> >
>
> Nit: there is a rogue newline here. I'm also not such a fan of mixing
> shorthand 'unsigned' with existing 'unsigned int' (as in probe).
full ack. checkpatch even warns about unsigned without int. *sigh*
> > [...]
>
> That being said, the patch is functionally correct and I validated all
> corner cases with actual hardware. Feel free to add to future cosmetic
> revisions:
>
> Tested-by: Jeff LaBundy <jeff@labundy.com>
done, thanks
These are the only changes since v3 (i.e.
- use unsigned int instead of unsigned
- remove empty line
- add Tested-by
)
Best regards
Uwe
drivers/pwm/pwm-iqs620a.c | 8 +++++---
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-iqs620a.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-iqs620a.c
index 5ede8255926e..14b18fb4f527 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-iqs620a.c
+++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-iqs620a.c
@@ -46,7 +46,8 @@ static int iqs620_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
{
struct iqs620_pwm_private *iqs620_pwm;
struct iqs62x_core *iqs62x;
- u64 duty_scale;
+ unsigned int duty_cycle;
+ unsigned int duty_scale;
int ret;
if (state->polarity != PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL)
@@ -70,7 +71,8 @@ static int iqs620_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
* For lower duty cycles (e.g. 0), the PWM output is simply disabled to
* allow an external pull-down resistor to hold the GPIO3/LTX pin low.
*/
- duty_scale = div_u64(state->duty_cycle * 256, IQS620_PWM_PERIOD_NS);
+ duty_cycle = min_t(u64, state->duty_cycle, IQS620_PWM_PERIOD_NS);
+ duty_scale = duty_cycle * 256 / IQS620_PWM_PERIOD_NS;
mutex_lock(&iqs620_pwm->lock);
@@ -82,7 +84,7 @@ static int iqs620_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
}
if (duty_scale) {
- u8 duty_val = min_t(u64, duty_scale - 1, 0xff);
+ u8 duty_val = duty_scale - 1;
ret = regmap_write(iqs62x->regmap, IQS620_PWM_DUTY_CYCLE,
duty_val);
--
2.29.2
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-01-15 7:33 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-01-14 21:50 [PATCH v3] pwm: iqs620a: Fix overflow and optimize calculations Uwe Kleine-König
2021-01-15 4:07 ` Jeff LaBundy
2021-01-15 7:32 ` [PATCH v4] " Uwe Kleine-König
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).