Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230113083115.2590-1-nylon.chen@sifive.com> <Y8GjySjm9OjoZvCF@spud>
 <95F1EAA0-D8D6-4F8A-8049-5E7BFDE4C06C@jrtc27.com>
In-Reply-To: <95F1EAA0-D8D6-4F8A-8049-5E7BFDE4C06C@jrtc27.com>
From:   Nylon Chen <nylon.chen@sifive.com>
Date:   Wed, 18 Jan 2023 10:30:52 +0800
Message-ID: <CAHh=Yk8=-LvJ3ygC8aK6y7FBFaOyiZ1UQY9PSXWwNwJAWYJW8w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Change PWM-controlled LED pin active mode and algorithm
To:     Jessica Clarke <jrtc27@jrtc27.com>
Cc:     Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
        nylon7717@gmail.com, zong.li@sifive.com, greentime.hu@sifive.com,
        vincent.chen@sifive.com, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Uwe_Kleine=2DK=C3=B6nig?= 
        <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

Hi Jess,

as you said, I use LED directly connected to PWM logic to modify it.

As I stated in my previous article, the key is that the lower the PWM
output is, the brighter the LED light is(active-low), the higher the
PWM output is, the brighter the LED light is(active-high).

Therefore, I would point out the waveform diagram below, the output
result remains the same for the circuit, but when you use
active-low/active-high to look at it, you will get two completely
different results of brightness.

e.g. duty=3D30s, period=3D100s, actvie-high =3D 30%, active-low =3D 70%

V
^
|
| ----------|
|             |
|             |
|______ |__________ > t

Jessica Clarke <jrtc27@jrtc27.com> =E6=96=BC 2023=E5=B9=B41=E6=9C=8814=E6=
=97=A5 =E9=80=B1=E5=85=AD =E4=B8=8A=E5=8D=883:24=E5=AF=AB=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A
>
> On 13 Jan 2023, at 18:32, Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > +CC Uwe, Thierry, linux-pwm
> >
> > Hey Nylon,
> >
> > Please run scripts/get_maintainer.pl before sending patches, you missed
> > both me & the PWM maintainers unfortunately!
> > AFAIK, the PWM maintainers use patchwork, so you will probably have to
> > resend this patchset so that it is on their radar.
> > I've marked the series as "Changes Requested" on the RISC-V one.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 04:31:13PM +0800, Nylon Chen wrote:
> >
> >> According to the circuit diagram of User LEDs - RGB described in the
> >> manual hifive-unmatched-schematics-v3.pdf[0].
> >> The behavior of PWM is acitve-high.
> >>
> >> According to the descriptionof PWM for pwmcmp in SiFive FU740-C000
> >> Manual[1].
> >> The pwm algorithm is (PW) pulse active time  =3D (D) duty * (T) period=
[2].
> >> The `frac` variable is pulse "inactive" time so we need to invert it.
> >>
> >> So this patchset removes active-low in DTS and adds reverse logic to
> >> the driver.
> >>
> >> [0]:https://sifive-china.oss-cn-zhangjiakou.aliyuncs.com/HiFIve%20Unma=
tched/hifive-unmatched-schematics-v3.pdf
> >> [1]:https://sifive-china.oss-cn-zhangjiakou.aliyuncs.com/HiFIve%20Unma=
tched/fu740-c000-manual-v1p2.pdf
> >> [2]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_cycle
> >
> > Please delete link 2, convert the other two to standard Link: tags and
> > put this information in the dts patch. Possibly into the PWM patch too,
> > depending on what the PWM maintainers think.
> > This info should be in the commit history IMO and the commit message fo=
r
> > the dts patch says what's obvious from the diff without any explanation
> > as to why.
> >
> > I did a bit of looking around on lore, to see if I could figure out
> > why it was done like this in the first place, and I found:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pwm/CAJ2_jOG2M03aLBgUOgGjWH9CUxq2aTG97eSX=
70=3DUaSbGCMMF_g@mail.gmail.com/
>
> That DTS documentation makes no sense to me, why does what the LED is
> wired to matter? Whether you have your transistor next to ground or
> next to Vdd doesn=E2=80=99t matter, what matters is whether the transisto=
r is
> on or off. Maybe what they mean is whether the *PWM's output* / *the
> transistor's input* is pulled to ground or Vdd? In which case the
> property would indeed not apply here.
>
> Unless that=E2=80=99s written assuming the LED is wired directly to the P=
WM, in
> which case it would make sense, but that=E2=80=99s a very narrow-minded v=
iew of
> what the PWM output is (directly) driving.
>
> Jess
>
> > That doesn't explain the driver, but it does explain the dts being that
> > way. Perhaps a Fixes tag is also in order? But only if both patches get
> > one, otherwise backporting would lead to breakage.
> >
> > The min() construct appears to have been there since the RFC driver was
> > first posted.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Conor.
> >
> >>
> >> Nylon Chen (2):
> >>  riscv: dts: sifive unmatched: Remove PWM controlled LED's active-low
> >
> > nit: s/sifive unmatched:/sifive: unmatched:/
> >
> >>    properties
> >>  pwm: sifive: change the PWM controlled LED algorithm
> >>
> >> arch/riscv/boot/dts/sifive/hifive-unmatched-a00.dts | 4 ----
> >> drivers/pwm/pwm-sifive.c                            | 1 +
> >> 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> --
> >> 2.36.1
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> linux-riscv mailing list
> >> linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
> >> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
> > _______________________________________________
> > linux-riscv mailing list
> > linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
> > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
>