From: Olliver Schinagl <oliver@schinagl.nl>
To: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>
Cc: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org>,
linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] pwm: sunxi: allow the pwm to finish its pulse before disable
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 10:46:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1474879585.6096.33.camel@schinagl.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160924202502.GF16901@lukather>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3696 bytes --]
On za, 2016-09-24 at 22:25 +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> Hi Oliver,
>
> Sorry for the slow answer.
>
> On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 11:01:08AM +0200, Olliver Schinagl wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm)
> > > > > > spin_lock(&sun4i_pwm->ctrl_lock);
> > > > > > val = sun4i_pwm_readl(sun4i_pwm, PWM_CTRL_REG);
> > > > > > val &= ~BIT_CH(PWM_EN, pwm->hwpwm);
> > > > > > + sun4i_pwm_writel(sun4i_pwm, val, PWM_CTRL_REG);
> > > > > > + spin_unlock(&sun4i_pwm->ctrl_lock);
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > + /* Allow for the PWM hardware to finish its last
> > > > > > toggle.
> > > > > > The pulse
> > > > > > + * may have just started and thus we should wait a
> > > > > > full
> > > > > > period.
> > > > > > + */
> > > > > > + ndelay(pwm_get_period(pwm));
> > > > >
> > > > > Can't that use the ready bit as well?
> > > > It depends whatever is cheaper. If we disable the pwm, we have
> > > > to
> > > > commit that request to hardware first. Then we have to read
> > > > back
> > > > the
> > > > has ready and in the strange situation it is not, wait for it
> > > > to
> > > > become
> > > > ready?
> > >
> > > If it works like you were suggesting, yes.
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Also, that would mean we would loop in a spin lock, or keep
> > > > setting/clearing an additional spinlock to read the ready bit.
> > >
> > > You're using a spin_lock, so it's not that bad, but I was just
> > > suggesting replacing the ndelay.
> >
> > If you say the spin_lock + wait for the ready is just as expensive
> > as
> > the ndelay, or the ndelay is less preferred, then I gladly make the
> > change;
>
> For the spin_lock part, I was just comparing it to a
> spin_lock_irqsave, which is pretty expensive since it masks all the
> interrupts in the system, introducing latencies.
so spin_lock is very expensive and we should avoid if we can?
>
> >
> > but I think we need the ndelay for the else where we do not
> > have the ready flag (A10 or A13 iirc?)
>
> Hmmmm, good point. But that would also apply to your second patch
> then, wouldn't it?
yeah, you would have an if/else for the case of !hasready.
this is what i've been dabbling in the train last week, but haven't
thought it through yet, let alone tested it:
+ if (!(sun4i_pwm->data->has_rdy))
+ ndelay(pwm_get_period(pwm));
+ else
+ do {
+ spin_lock(&sun4i_pwm->ctrl_lock);
+ val = sun4i_pwm_readl(sun4i_pwm, PWM_CTRL_REG);
+ spin_unlock(&sun4i_pwm->ctrl_lock);
+ } while (!(val & PWM_RDY(pwm->hwpwm)))
Here I assumed the spin_lock is cheap to make, expensive to hold for
long, e.g. reducing the length the spin-lock is active for. the
alternative was to remove the spin_lock here, and remove unlock-lock
before-after this block where you basically get a very long lasting
spin_lock, the alternative.
spin_lock(&sun4i_pwm->ctrl_lock);
val = sun4i_pwm_readl(sun4i_pwm, PWM_CTRL_REG);
+ if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_rdy && (!(val & PWM_RDY(pwm->hwpwm))))
+ dev_warn(chip->dev, "never became ready\n");
this may be useful for debugging i thought.
val &= ~BIT_CH(PWM_CLK_GATING, pwm->hwpwm);
sun4i_pwm_writel(sun4i_pwm, val, PWM_CTRL_REG);
spin_unlock(&sun4i_pwm->ctrl_lock);
Olliver
>
> Maxime
>
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-26 8:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-25 17:50 [PATCHv2 0/2] pwm: sunxi: give the pwm IP block more time Olliver Schinagl
2016-08-25 17:50 ` [PATCH 1/2] pwm: sunxi: allow the pwm to finish its pulse before disable Olliver Schinagl
2016-08-26 22:19 ` Maxime Ripard
2016-09-06 7:12 ` Olliver Schinagl
2016-09-06 19:51 ` Maxime Ripard
2016-09-09 9:01 ` Olliver Schinagl
2016-09-24 20:25 ` Maxime Ripard
2016-09-26 8:46 ` Olliver Schinagl [this message]
2016-09-27 20:16 ` Maxime Ripard
[not found] ` <afcb938d-d2df-4740-6c85-cdf2766f671c@schinagl.nl>
2016-12-12 12:24 ` Maxime Ripard
2017-01-03 15:59 ` Olliver Schinagl
2017-01-03 16:55 ` Alexandre Belloni
2017-01-04 6:36 ` Thierry Reding
2016-09-23 14:02 ` [1/2] " Jonathan Liu
2016-09-23 14:03 ` Olliver Schinagl
2017-05-05 1:54 ` Jonathan Liu
2016-08-25 17:50 ` [PATCH 2/2] pwm: sunxi: Yield some time to the pwm-block to become ready Olliver Schinagl
2016-08-26 22:25 ` Maxime Ripard
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=1474879585.6096.33.camel@schinagl.nl \
--to=oliver@schinagl.nl \
--cc=alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com \
--cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
--cc=wens@csie.org \
/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).