Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 8 Dec 2020 10:10:33 +0100
From:   Uwe =?utf-8?Q?Kleine-K=C3=B6nig?= <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
To:     Clemens Gruber <clemens.gruber@pqgruber.com>
Cc:     linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Sven Van Asbroeck <TheSven73@gmail.com>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
        David Jander <david@protonic.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] pwm: pca9685: Switch to atomic API
Message-ID: <20201208091033.bxzrlad7mjbe3dsp@pengutronix.de>
References: <20201207193629.493241-1-clemens.gruber@pqgruber.com>
 <20201207220025.42b6g76wq7ph5nvb@pengutronix.de>
 <X863KNo0IaekkU7q@workstation.tuxnet>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="acneiids2f4t3ggq"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <X863KNo0IaekkU7q@workstation.tuxnet>
Precedence: bulk


--acneiids2f4t3ggq
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello Clemens,

On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 12:13:44AM +0100, Clemens Gruber wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 11:00:25PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K=F6nig wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 08:36:27PM +0100, Clemens Gruber wrote:
> > > The hardware readout may return slightly different values than those
> > > that were set in apply due to the limited range of possible prescale =
and
> > > counter register values. If one channel is reconfigured with new duty
> > > cycle and period, the others will keep the same relative duty cycle to
> > > period ratio as they had before, even though the per-chip / global
> > > frequency changed. (The PCA9685 has only one prescaler!)
> >=20
> > This is not acceptable, if you have two PWM outputs and a consumer
> > modifies one of them the other must change. So if this chip only
> > supports a single period length of all channels, the first consumer
> > enabling a channel defines the period to be used. All later consumers
> > must live with that. (Also the first must be denied modifying the period
> > if a second consumer has enabled its PWM.)
>=20
> Good idea, but is it OK to potentially break users relying on the old
> behavior ("the last one who changes the period wins") ?

If this is already in the old code, this probably warrants a separate
fix, and yes, I consider this a severe bug. (Consider one channel
driving a motor and reconfiguring an LED modifies the motor's speed.)

Best regards
Uwe

--=20
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-K=F6nig            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |

--acneiids2f4t3ggq
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEfnIqFpAYrP8+dKQLwfwUeK3K7AkFAl/PQwYACgkQwfwUeK3K
7AmQZAf/aRaIyHctz+EjoBIMGw6tBPqXWyDp7J3Fbgi28mFexFy+tbd0YqXHHTPD
IYWbUtDb7KSu/IC9mxpXP3SYiSlzA4n3Br2yk3f/xgRyhy6R9DCLQlHoVcx7bnqO
xdYRNyisMprl4sMINFG0ipDT0Cv6CdNrZdEgi8uidWgY7Zzje2hx2In2H3GFlT89
cZ2S6DoVRNdE8XU2FMCdjZ9qvaw12w42oPRcH0oEao1ycSoGQ9dSGBKDi6iUzijX
gtA4gzkQpxJ1LUlVgkG5cy+zENn4bXZD8XHxdsoWLfNw0CkPBXQFYkpHtBfMc/qZ
JkA1aV1ij3kmuVxv4WSn9ui4L6RdpA==
=lGAt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--acneiids2f4t3ggq--