| Message ID | 1661745852-27323-1-git-send-email-xinlei.lee@mediatek.com |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested |
| Headers | show |
| Series | pwm: mtk-disp: Fix the parameters calculated by the enabled flag of disp_pwm. | expand |
Il 29/08/22 06:04, xinlei.lee@mediatek.com ha scritto: > From: xinlei lee <xinlei.lee@mediatek.com> > > In the original mtk_disp_pwm_get_state() function, the result of reading > con0 & BIT(0) is enabled as disp_pwm. > In order to conform to the register table, we should use the disp_pwm > base address as the enabled judgment. > > Fixes: 3f2b16734914 ("pwm: mtk-disp: Implement atomic API .get_state()") > > Signed-off-by: xinlei lee <xinlei.lee@mediatek.com> > Reviewed-by: Miles Chen <miles.chen@mediatek.com> This fix is valid for all MediaTek SoCs that are currently supported in pwm-mtk-disp (and some others that aren't supported yet). Reviewed-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
Hello, On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 12:04:12PM +0800, xinlei.lee@mediatek.com wrote: > From: xinlei lee <xinlei.lee@mediatek.com> > > In the original mtk_disp_pwm_get_state() function, the result of reading > con0 & BIT(0) is enabled as disp_pwm. > In order to conform to the register table, we should use the disp_pwm > base address as the enabled judgment. Do you want to say: The enable bit of the hardware is bit 0 of the DISP_PWM_EN register at offset 0 for all supported hardwares. Up to now the bit was wrongly assumed to be in the CON0 register. ? > Fixes: 3f2b16734914 ("pwm: mtk-disp: Implement atomic API .get_state()") > This newline is unusal. > Signed-off-by: xinlei lee <xinlei.lee@mediatek.com> > Reviewed-by: Miles Chen <miles.chen@mediatek.com> > --- > Base on the branch of Linux-next/master. > Split from series [1]. > [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-mediatek/cover/1661239875-19841-1-git-send-email-xinlei.lee@mediatek.com/ > --- > --- > drivers/pwm/pwm-mtk-disp.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-mtk-disp.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-mtk-disp.c > index c605013..50425cd 100644 > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-mtk-disp.c > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-mtk-disp.c > @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ static void mtk_disp_pwm_get_state(struct pwm_chip *chip, > rate = clk_get_rate(mdp->clk_main); > con0 = readl(mdp->base + mdp->data->con0); > con1 = readl(mdp->base + mdp->data->con1); > - state->enabled = !!(con0 & BIT(0)); > + state->enabled = !!(readl(mdp->base) & BIT(0)); I would expect this to better be: state->enabled = !!(readl(mdp->base + DISP_PWM_EN) & BIT(0)); which is the same for the compiler but a bit more descriptive for the human reader. > clk_div = FIELD_GET(PWM_CLKDIV_MASK, con0); > period = FIELD_GET(PWM_PERIOD_MASK, con1); > /* Best regards Uwe
diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-mtk-disp.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-mtk-disp.c index c605013..50425cd 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-mtk-disp.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-mtk-disp.c @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ static void mtk_disp_pwm_get_state(struct pwm_chip *chip, rate = clk_get_rate(mdp->clk_main); con0 = readl(mdp->base + mdp->data->con0); con1 = readl(mdp->base + mdp->data->con1); - state->enabled = !!(con0 & BIT(0)); + state->enabled = !!(readl(mdp->base) & BIT(0)); clk_div = FIELD_GET(PWM_CLKDIV_MASK, con0); period = FIELD_GET(PWM_PERIOD_MASK, con1); /*