From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>
Cc: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Milo Kim <milo.kim@ti.com>,
Doug Anderson <dianders@google.com>,
Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>,
Stephen Barber <smbarber@chromium.org>,
Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>,
Ajit Pal Singh <ajitpal.singh@st.com>,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@gmail.com>,
Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@st.com>,
Patrice Chotard <patrice.chotard@st.com>,
kernel@stlinux.com, Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
Subject: [PATCH v3 10/14] regulator: pwm: Switch to the atomic PWM API
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 11:13:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1465895602-31008-11-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1465895602-31008-1-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
Use the atomic API wherever appropriate and get rid of pwm_apply_args()
call (the reference period and polarity are now explicitly set when
calling pwm_apply_state()).
We also make use of the pwm_set_relative_duty_cycle() helper to ease
relative to absolute duty_cycle conversion.
Note that changes introduced by commit fd786fb0276a ("regulator: pwm:
Try to avoid voltage error in duty cycle calculation") are no longer
needed because pwm_set_relative_duty_cycle() takes care of all rounding
approximation for us.
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
Reviewed-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
Tested-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
Acked-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>
Tested-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
---
drivers/regulator/pwm-regulator.c | 38 ++++++++++----------------------------
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/pwm-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/pwm-regulator.c
index 524b43f..ad75360 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/pwm-regulator.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/pwm-regulator.c
@@ -59,16 +59,14 @@ static int pwm_regulator_set_voltage_sel(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
unsigned selector)
{
struct pwm_regulator_data *drvdata = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
- struct pwm_args pargs;
- int dutycycle;
+ struct pwm_state pstate;
int ret;
- pwm_get_args(drvdata->pwm, &pargs);
+ pwm_init_state(drvdata->pwm, &pstate);
+ pwm_set_relative_duty_cycle(&pstate,
+ drvdata->duty_cycle_table[selector].dutycycle, 100);
- dutycycle = (pargs.period *
- drvdata->duty_cycle_table[selector].dutycycle) / 100;
-
- ret = pwm_config(drvdata->pwm, dutycycle, pargs.period);
+ ret = pwm_apply_state(drvdata->pwm, &pstate);
if (ret) {
dev_err(&rdev->dev, "Failed to configure PWM: %d\n", ret);
return ret;
@@ -126,34 +124,18 @@ static int pwm_regulator_set_voltage(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
{
struct pwm_regulator_data *drvdata = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
unsigned int ramp_delay = rdev->constraints->ramp_delay;
- struct pwm_args pargs;
unsigned int req_diff = min_uV - rdev->constraints->min_uV;
+ struct pwm_state pstate;
unsigned int diff;
- unsigned int duty_pulse;
- u64 req_period;
- u32 rem;
int ret;
- pwm_get_args(drvdata->pwm, &pargs);
+ pwm_init_state(drvdata->pwm, &pstate);
diff = rdev->constraints->max_uV - rdev->constraints->min_uV;
- /* First try to find out if we get the iduty cycle time which is
- * factor of PWM period time. If (request_diff_to_min * pwm_period)
- * is perfect divided by voltage_range_diff then it is possible to
- * get duty cycle time which is factor of PWM period. This will help
- * to get output voltage nearer to requested value as there is no
- * calculation loss.
- */
- req_period = req_diff * pargs.period;
- div_u64_rem(req_period, diff, &rem);
- if (!rem) {
- do_div(req_period, diff);
- duty_pulse = (unsigned int)req_period;
- } else {
- duty_pulse = (pargs.period / 100) * ((req_diff * 100) / diff);
- }
+ /* We pass diff as the scale to get a uV precision. */
+ pwm_set_relative_duty_cycle(&pstate, req_diff, diff);
- ret = pwm_config(drvdata->pwm, duty_pulse, pargs.period);
+ ret = pwm_apply_state(drvdata->pwm, &pstate);
if (ret) {
dev_err(&rdev->dev, "Failed to configure PWM: %d\n", ret);
return ret;
--
2.7.4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-14 9:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-14 9:13 [PATCH v3 00/14] regulator: pwm: various improvements Boris Brezillon
2016-06-14 9:13 ` [PATCH v3 01/14] pwm: Add an helper to prepare a new PWM state Boris Brezillon
2016-06-14 9:13 ` [PATCH v3 02/14] pwm: Add two helpers to ease relative duty cycle manipulation Boris Brezillon
2016-06-14 9:13 ` [PATCH v3 03/14] pwm: rockchip: Fix period and duty_cycle approximation Boris Brezillon
2016-06-14 9:13 ` [PATCH v3 04/14] pwm: rockchip: Add support for hardware readout Boris Brezillon
2016-06-14 9:13 ` [PATCH v3 05/14] pwm: rockchip: Avoid glitches on already running PWMs Boris Brezillon
2016-06-14 9:13 ` [PATCH v3 06/14] pwm: rockchip: Add support for atomic update Boris Brezillon
2016-06-14 9:13 ` [PATCH v3 07/14] pwm: sti: Add support for hardware readout Boris Brezillon
2016-06-14 9:13 ` [PATCH v3 08/14] pwm: sti: Avoid glitches on already running PWMs Boris Brezillon
2016-06-14 9:13 ` [PATCH v3 09/14] regulator: pwm: Adjust PWM config at probe time Boris Brezillon
2016-06-14 9:13 ` Boris Brezillon [this message]
2016-07-05 14:30 ` [PATCH v3 10/14] regulator: pwm: Switch to the atomic PWM API Mark Brown
2016-06-14 9:13 ` [PATCH v3 11/14] regulator: pwm: Properly initialize the ->state field Boris Brezillon
2016-07-05 14:31 ` Mark Brown
2016-06-14 9:13 ` [PATCH v3 12/14] regulator: pwm: Retrieve correct voltage Boris Brezillon
2016-07-05 14:32 ` Mark Brown
2016-07-08 15:43 ` Thierry Reding
2016-07-09 9:47 ` Mark Brown
2016-07-11 7:02 ` Thierry Reding
2016-07-11 7:20 ` Boris Brezillon
2016-07-11 16:53 ` Doug Anderson
2016-06-14 9:13 ` [PATCH v3 13/14] regulator: pwm: Support extra continuous mode cases Boris Brezillon
2016-07-05 14:34 ` Mark Brown
2016-06-14 9:13 ` [PATCH v3 14/14] regulator: pwm: Document pwm-dutycycle-unit and pwm-dutycycle-range Boris Brezillon
2016-06-16 22:26 ` Rob Herring
2016-07-05 14:36 ` Mark Brown
2016-07-08 16:35 ` [PATCH v3 00/14] regulator: pwm: various improvements Thierry Reding
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=1465895602-31008-11-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com \
--to=boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com \
--cc=ajitpal.singh@st.com \
--cc=briannorris@chromium.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dianders@google.com \
--cc=galak@codeaurora.org \
--cc=heiko@sntech.de \
--cc=ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk \
--cc=kernel@stlinux.com \
--cc=ldewangan@nvidia.com \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=maxime.coquelin@st.com \
--cc=milo.kim@ti.com \
--cc=patrice.chotard@st.com \
--cc=pawel.moll@arm.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=smbarber@chromium.org \
--cc=srinivas.kandagatla@gmail.com \
--cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
--cc=wxt@rock-chips.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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).