Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] pwm: rockchip: Added to support for RK3288 SoC

[Heiko Stübner]

Hi Caesar.

Am Mittwoch, 23. Juli 2014, 14:38:41 schrieb Caesar Wang:
> This patch added to support the PWM controller found on
> RK3288 SoC.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <caesar.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c | 141
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 122
> insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c
> index eec2145..8d72a98 100644
> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
>   * PWM driver for Rockchip SoCs
>   *
>   * Copyright (C) 2014 Beniamino Galvani <b.galvani@xxxxxxxxx>
> + * Copyright (C) 2014 Caesar Wang <caesar.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

you might want to check who actually holds the copyright for your 
contributions, I guess a "Copyright (C) 2014 Rockchip"-something would be more 
appropriate?


>   *
>   * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
>   * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
> @@ -12,6 +13,7 @@
>  #include <linux/io.h>
>  #include <linux/module.h>
>  #include <linux/of.h>
> +#include <linux/of_device.h>
>  #include <linux/platform_device.h>
>  #include <linux/pwm.h>
>  #include <linux/time.h>
> @@ -25,17 +27,89 @@
> 
>  #define PRESCALER		2
> 
> +#define PWM_ENABLE		(1 << 0)
> +#define PWM_CONTINUOUS		(1 << 1)
> +#define PWM_DUTY_POSITIVE	(1 << 3)
> +#define PWM_INACTIVE_NEGATIVE	(0 << 4)
> +#define PWM_OUTPUT_LEFT		(0 << 5)
> +#define PWM_LP_DISABLE		(0 << 8)
> +
>  struct rockchip_pwm_chip {
>  	struct pwm_chip chip;
>  	struct clk *clk;
> +	const struct rockchip_pwm_data *data;
>  	void __iomem *base;
>  };
> 
> +struct rockchip_pwm_regs {
> +	unsigned long duty;
> +	unsigned long period;
> +	unsigned long cntr;
> +	unsigned long ctrl;
> +};
> +
> +struct rockchip_pwm_data {
> +	struct rockchip_pwm_regs regs;
> +	unsigned int prescaler;
> +
> +	void (*set_enable)(struct pwm_chip *chip, bool enable);
> +};
> +
>  static inline struct rockchip_pwm_chip *to_rockchip_pwm_chip(struct
> pwm_chip *c) {
>  	return container_of(c, struct rockchip_pwm_chip, chip);
>  }
> 
> +static void rockchip_pwm_set_enable_v1(struct pwm_chip *chip, bool enable)
> +{
> +	struct rockchip_pwm_chip *pc = to_rockchip_pwm_chip(chip);
> +	u32 val = 0;
> +	u32 enable_conf = PWM_CTRL_OUTPUT_EN | PWM_CTRL_TIMER_EN;
> +
> +	val = readl_relaxed(pc->base + pc->data->regs.ctrl);
> +
> +	if (enable)
> +		val |= enable_conf;
> +	else
> +		val &= ~enable_conf;
> +
> +	writel_relaxed(val, pc->base + pc->data->regs.ctrl);
> +}
> +
> +static void rockchip_pwm_set_enable_v2(struct pwm_chip *chip, bool enable)
> +{
> +	struct rockchip_pwm_chip *pc = to_rockchip_pwm_chip(chip);
> +	u32 val = 0;
> +	u32 enable_conf = PWM_OUTPUT_LEFT | PWM_LP_DISABLE | PWM_ENABLE |
> +		PWM_CONTINUOUS | PWM_DUTY_POSITIVE | PWM_INACTIVE_NEGATIVE;
> +
> +	val = readl_relaxed(pc->base + pc->data->regs.ctrl);
> +
> +	if (enable)
> +		val |= enable_conf;
> +	else
> +		val &= ~enable_conf;
> +
> +	writel_relaxed(val, pc->base + pc->data->regs.ctrl);
> +}
> +
> +static void rockchip_pwm_set_enable_vop(struct pwm_chip *chip, bool enable)
> +{
> +	struct rockchip_pwm_chip *pc = to_rockchip_pwm_chip(chip);
> +	u32 val = 0;
> +	u32 enable_conf = PWM_OUTPUT_LEFT | PWM_LP_DISABLE | PWM_ENABLE |
> +		PWM_CONTINUOUS | PWM_DUTY_POSITIVE | PWM_INACTIVE_NEGATIVE;
> +
> +	val = readl_relaxed(pc->base + pc->data->regs.ctrl);
> +
> +	if (enable)
> +		val |= enable_conf;
> +	else
> +		val &= ~enable_conf;
> +
> +	writel_relaxed(val, pc->base + pc->data->regs.ctrl);
> +}

not sure if I'm just blind ... do rockchip_pwm_set_enable_v2 and 
rockchip_pwm_set_enable_vop differ at all?

If they don't differ, I guess pwm_data_vop should just use 
rockchip_pwm_set_enable_v2 instead of duplicating it.


Heiko

> +
>  static int rockchip_pwm_config(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device
> *pwm, int duty_ns, int period_ns)
>  {
> @@ -52,20 +126,20 @@ static int rockchip_pwm_config(struct pwm_chip *chip,
> struct pwm_device *pwm, * default prescaler value for all practical clock
> rate values.
>  	 */
>  	div = clk_rate * period_ns;
> -	do_div(div, PRESCALER * NSEC_PER_SEC);
> +	do_div(div, pc->data->prescaler * NSEC_PER_SEC);
>  	period = div;
> 
>  	div = clk_rate * duty_ns;
> -	do_div(div, PRESCALER * NSEC_PER_SEC);
> +	do_div(div, pc->data->prescaler * NSEC_PER_SEC);
>  	duty = div;
> 
>  	ret = clk_enable(pc->clk);
>  	if (ret)
>  		return ret;
> 
> -	writel(period, pc->base + PWM_LRC);
> -	writel(duty, pc->base + PWM_HRC);
> -	writel(0, pc->base + PWM_CNTR);
> +	writel(period, pc->base + pc->data->regs.period);
> +	writel(duty, pc->base + pc->data->regs.duty);
> +	writel(0, pc->base + pc->data->regs.cntr);
> 
>  	clk_disable(pc->clk);
> 
> @@ -76,15 +150,12 @@ static int rockchip_pwm_enable(struct pwm_chip *chip,
> struct pwm_device *pwm) {
>  	struct rockchip_pwm_chip *pc = to_rockchip_pwm_chip(chip);
>  	int ret;
> -	u32 val;
> 
>  	ret = clk_enable(pc->clk);
>  	if (ret)
>  		return ret;
> 
> -	val = readl_relaxed(pc->base + PWM_CTRL);
> -	val |= PWM_CTRL_OUTPUT_EN | PWM_CTRL_TIMER_EN;
> -	writel_relaxed(val, pc->base + PWM_CTRL);
> +	pc->data->set_enable(chip, true);
> 
>  	return 0;
>  }
> @@ -92,11 +163,8 @@ static int rockchip_pwm_enable(struct pwm_chip *chip,
> struct pwm_device *pwm) static void rockchip_pwm_disable(struct pwm_chip
> *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm) {
>  	struct rockchip_pwm_chip *pc = to_rockchip_pwm_chip(chip);
> -	u32 val;
> 
> -	val = readl_relaxed(pc->base + PWM_CTRL);
> -	val &= ~(PWM_CTRL_OUTPUT_EN | PWM_CTRL_TIMER_EN);
> -	writel_relaxed(val, pc->base + PWM_CTRL);
> +	pc->data->set_enable(chip, false);
> 
>  	clk_disable(pc->clk);
>  }
> @@ -108,12 +176,52 @@ static const struct pwm_ops rockchip_pwm_ops = {
>  	.owner = THIS_MODULE,
>  };
> 
> +static const struct rockchip_pwm_data pwm_data_v1 = {
> +	.regs.duty = PWM_HRC,
> +	.regs.period = PWM_LRC,
> +	.regs.cntr = PWM_CNTR,
> +	.regs.ctrl = PWM_CTRL,
> +	.prescaler = PRESCALER,
> +	.set_enable = rockchip_pwm_set_enable_v1,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct rockchip_pwm_data pwm_data_v2 = {
> +	.regs.duty = PWM_LRC,
> +	.regs.period = PWM_HRC,
> +	.regs.cntr = PWM_CNTR,
> +	.regs.ctrl = PWM_CTRL,
> +	.prescaler = PRESCALER-1,
> +	.set_enable = rockchip_pwm_set_enable_v2,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct rockchip_pwm_data pwm_data_vop = {
> +	.regs.duty = PWM_LRC,
> +	.regs.period = PWM_HRC,
> +	.regs.cntr = PWM_CTRL,
> +	.regs.ctrl = PWM_CNTR,
> +	.prescaler = PRESCALER-1,
> +	.set_enable = rockchip_pwm_set_enable_vop,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct of_device_id rockchip_pwm_dt_ids[] = {
> +	{ .compatible = "rockchip,rk2928-pwm", .data = &pwm_data_v1},
> +	{ .compatible = "rockchip,rk3288-pwm", .data = &pwm_data_v2},
> +	{ .compatible = "rockchip,vop-pwm", .data = &pwm_data_vop},
> +	{ /* sentinel */ }
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, rockchip_pwm_dt_ids);
> +
>  static int rockchip_pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  {
> +	const struct of_device_id *id;
>  	struct rockchip_pwm_chip *pc;
>  	struct resource *r;
>  	int ret;
> 
> +	id = of_match_device(rockchip_pwm_dt_ids, &pdev->dev);
> +	if (!id)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
>  	pc = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*pc), GFP_KERNEL);
>  	if (!pc)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
> @@ -133,6 +241,7 @@ static int rockchip_pwm_probe(struct platform_device
> *pdev)
> 
>  	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, pc);
> 
> +	pc->data = id->data;
>  	pc->chip.dev = &pdev->dev;
>  	pc->chip.ops = &rockchip_pwm_ops;
>  	pc->chip.base = -1;
> @@ -156,12 +265,6 @@ static int rockchip_pwm_remove(struct platform_device
> *pdev) return pwmchip_remove(&pc->chip);
>  }
> 
> -static const struct of_device_id rockchip_pwm_dt_ids[] = {
> -	{ .compatible = "rockchip,rk2928-pwm" },
> -	{ /* sentinel */ }
> -};
> -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, rockchip_pwm_dt_ids);
> -
>  static struct platform_driver rockchip_pwm_driver = {
>  	.driver = {
>  		.name = "rockchip-pwm",

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/