Re: [PATCH 3/4] pwm: mxs: add support for inverse polarity

From: Uwe Kleine-König
Date: Mon Sep 23 2019 - 04:54:20 EST


On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 10:45:56AM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> On 23/09/2019 10.27, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 10:13:47AM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> + pol_bits = state->polarity == PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL ?
> >> + PERIOD_POLARITY_NORMAL : PERIOD_POLARITY_INVERSE;
> >> +
> >> writel(duty_cycles << 16,
> >> mxs->base + PWM_ACTIVE0 + pwm->hwpwm * 0x20);
> >> - writel(PERIOD_PERIOD(period_cycles) | PERIOD_POLARITY_NORMAL | PERIOD_CDIV(div),
> >> + writel(PERIOD_PERIOD(period_cycles) | pol_bits | PERIOD_CDIV(div),
> >
> > When will this affect the output? Only on the next start of a period, or
> > immediatly? Can it happen that this results in a mixed output (i.e. a
> > period that has already the new duty cycle from the line above but not
> > the new polarity (or period)?
>
> The data sheet says "Also, when the user reprograms the channel in this
> manner, the new register values will not take effect until the beginning
> of a new output period. This eliminates the potential for output
> glitches that could occur if the registers were updated while the
> channel was enabled and in the middle of a cycle.". So I think this
> should be ok. "this manner" refers to the registers being written in the
> proper order (first ACTIVEn, then PERIODn).

OK. IMHO this is worth a code comment.

Best regards
Uwe

--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |