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;
Date:   Fri, 9 Jun 2023 16:21:55 +0200
From:   Uwe =?utf-8?Q?Kleine-K=C3=B6nig?= <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
To:     Fabrice Gasnier <fabrice.gasnier@foss.st.com>
Cc:     Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
        Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com>,
        linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pwm: stm32: Implement .get_state()
Message-ID: <20230609142155.h5fvn4fxdcleoznw@pengutronix.de>
References: <20230608-pwm-stm32-get-state-v1-1-db7e58a7461b@pengutronix.de>
 <dac9c545-fcbc-3aec-c341-abc62f551703@foss.st.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="wkz2lg5pii5fhdhh"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <dac9c545-fcbc-3aec-c341-abc62f551703@foss.st.com>
Precedence: bulk


--wkz2lg5pii5fhdhh
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello Fabrice,

On Fri, Jun 09, 2023 at 03:06:47PM +0200, Fabrice Gasnier wrote:
> On 6/8/23 16:06, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> > +static int stm32_pwm_get_state(struct pwm_chip *chip,
> > +			       struct pwm_device *pwm, struct pwm_state *state)
> > +{
> > +	struct stm32_pwm *priv =3D to_stm32_pwm_dev(chip);
> > +	int ch =3D pwm->hwpwm;
> > +	unsigned long rate;
> > +	u32 ccer, psc, arr, ccr;
> > +	u64 dty, prd;
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	ret =3D regmap_read(priv->regmap, TIM_CCER, &ccer);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		return ret;
> > +
> > +	state->enabled =3D ccer & (TIM_CCER_CC1E << (ch * 4));
> > +	state->polarity =3D (ccer & (TIM_CCER_CC1P << (ch * 4))) ?
> > +			  PWM_POLARITY_INVERSED : PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL;
> > +	regmap_read(priv->regmap, TIM_PSC, &psc);
> > +	regmap_read(priv->regmap, TIM_ARR, &arr);
> > +	read_ccrx(priv, ch, &ccr);
> > +	rate =3D clk_get_rate(priv->clk);
> > +
> > +	prd =3D (u64)NSEC_PER_SEC * (psc + 1) * (arr + 1);
> > +	state->period =3D DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(prd, rate);
> > +	dty =3D (u64)NSEC_PER_SEC * (psc + 1) * ccr;
> > +	state->duty_cycle =3D DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(dty, rate);
>=20
> Just a question/thought, could it be worth to use DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL()=
 ?

No, round up is the right choice. The reason for that is that .apply()
rounds down in its divisions. If you use ROUND_CLOSEST here, reapplying
the result from .get_state() might not be idempotent.

> > +
> > +	return ret;
> > +}

Best regards
Uwe

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

--wkz2lg5pii5fhdhh
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

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

iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEP4GsaTp6HlmJrf7Tj4D7WH0S/k4FAmSDNYMACgkQj4D7WH0S
/k7s5Af/RT0ZOdJvsT4ylvLPggQkwlMTUHV0alz7e2/4+uYnw8bv5kN9Ly38Mnm5
IKwDWxm5tRbuUNm658LqBYi4xXRnPdvkR3Sx18PE8KZsIkbjRcaizPk2UnkpIJKd
UWtztLyKTT5LUp2mn9WGjzUgC+eXW67uSY0/ChoWVANu9/J2bpbp2rpIz3l2vk30
jwdWMX61A7j5kS/XanteA7nKuFwI94MdzrfqCMSAW2w2YKS63RcA/aPr1tKtlPZv
77UHlviGhFPm7R4LrAaX3Swj2OIq3Lj7nREr9YUT5/vO+AULV9pX2nUvR9zAMVVw
y/4kR4atPgutjQ19zD+pfpXz/jlQGQ==
=yi3A
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--wkz2lg5pii5fhdhh--