linux-stable.git/drivers/pwm, branch linux-5.14.y Linux kernel stable tree pwm: stm32-lp: Don't modify HW state in .remove() callback 2021-09-26T12:10:24+00:00 Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de 2021-07-07T16:27:53+00:00 da66431417408f3ca742c28974ec3e4a272f1a84 [ Upstream commit d44084c93427bb0a9261432db1a8ca76a42d805e ] A consumer is expected to disable a PWM before calling pwm_put(). And if they didn't there is hopefully a good reason (or the consumer needs fixing). Also if disabling an enabled PWM was the right thing to do, this should better be done in the framework instead of in each low level driver. Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit d44084c93427bb0a9261432db1a8ca76a42d805e ]

A consumer is expected to disable a PWM before calling pwm_put(). And if
they didn't there is hopefully a good reason (or the consumer needs
fixing). Also if disabling an enabled PWM was the right thing to do,
this should better be done in the framework instead of in each low level
driver.

Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
pwm: rockchip: Don't modify HW state in .remove() callback 2021-09-26T12:10:24+00:00 Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de 2021-07-07T16:27:52+00:00 2c92f9e8e0392caf91d8fd43de177df505696e62 [ Upstream commit 9d768cd7fd42bb0be16f36aec48548fca5260759 ] A consumer is expected to disable a PWM before calling pwm_put(). And if they didn't there is hopefully a good reason (or the consumer needs fixing). Also if disabling an enabled PWM was the right thing to do, this should better be done in the framework instead of in each low level driver. Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit 9d768cd7fd42bb0be16f36aec48548fca5260759 ]

A consumer is expected to disable a PWM before calling pwm_put(). And if
they didn't there is hopefully a good reason (or the consumer needs
fixing). Also if disabling an enabled PWM was the right thing to do,
this should better be done in the framework instead of in each low level
driver.

Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
pwm: img: Don't modify HW state in .remove() callback 2021-09-26T12:10:24+00:00 Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de 2021-07-07T16:27:51+00:00 f53bd7fe1bf6cc5e9ca53b5b864121d75f622e34 [ Upstream commit c68eb29c8e9067c08175dd0414f6984f236f719d ] A consumer is expected to disable a PWM before calling pwm_put(). And if they didn't there is hopefully a good reason (or the consumer needs fixing). Also if disabling an enabled PWM was the right thing to do, this should better be done in the framework instead of in each low level driver. Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> 
[ Upstream commit c68eb29c8e9067c08175dd0414f6984f236f719d ]

A consumer is expected to disable a PWM before calling pwm_put(). And if
they didn't there is hopefully a good reason (or the consumer needs
fixing). Also if disabling an enabled PWM was the right thing to do,
this should better be done in the framework instead of in each low level
driver.

Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
pwm: mxs: Don't modify HW state in .probe() after the PWM chip was registered 2021-09-26T12:10:17+00:00 Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de 2021-07-07T16:27:50+00:00 81680e81b71ac64eb66e590da152f674fa4dfcde commit 020162d6f49f2963062229814a56a89c86cbeaa8 upstream. This fixes a race condition: After pwmchip_add() is called there might already be a consumer and then modifying the hardware behind the consumer's back is bad. So reset before calling pwmchip_add(). Note that reseting the hardware isn't the right thing to do if the PWM is already running as it might e.g. disable (or even enable) a backlight that is supposed to be on (or off). Fixes: 4dce82c1e840 ("pwm: add pwm-mxs support") Cc: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de> Cc: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> 
commit 020162d6f49f2963062229814a56a89c86cbeaa8 upstream.

This fixes a race condition: After pwmchip_add() is called there might
already be a consumer and then modifying the hardware behind the
consumer's back is bad. So reset before calling pwmchip_add().

Note that reseting the hardware isn't the right thing to do if the PWM
is already running as it might e.g. disable (or even enable) a backlight
that is supposed to be on (or off).

Fixes: 4dce82c1e840 ("pwm: add pwm-mxs support")
Cc: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
pwm: lpc32xx: Don't modify HW state in .probe() after the PWM chip was registered 2021-09-26T12:10:17+00:00 Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de 2021-07-07T16:27:49+00:00 1c90a357cef4219cb436e59cc7463888103e104b commit 3d2813fb17e5fd0d73c1d1442ca0192bde4af10e upstream. This fixes a race condition: After pwmchip_add() is called there might already be a consumer and then modifying the hardware behind the consumer's back is bad. So set the default before. (Side-note: I don't know what this register setting actually does, if this modifies the polarity there is an inconsistency because the inversed polarity isn't considered if the PWM is already running during .probe().) Fixes: acfd92fdfb93 ("pwm: lpc32xx: Set PWM_PIN_LEVEL bit to default value") Cc: Sylvain Lemieux <slemieux@tycoint.com> Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> 
commit 3d2813fb17e5fd0d73c1d1442ca0192bde4af10e upstream.

This fixes a race condition: After pwmchip_add() is called there might
already be a consumer and then modifying the hardware behind the
consumer's back is bad. So set the default before.

(Side-note: I don't know what this register setting actually does, if
this modifies the polarity there is an inconsistency because the
inversed polarity isn't considered if the PWM is already running during
.probe().)

Fixes: acfd92fdfb93 ("pwm: lpc32xx: Set PWM_PIN_LEVEL bit to default value")
Cc: Sylvain Lemieux <slemieux@tycoint.com>
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
pwm: ab8500: Fix register offset calculation to not depend on probe order 2021-09-26T12:10:17+00:00 Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de 2021-07-05T16:55:10+00:00 861006fa37d88419c4cfa0a4468d1638bf1f31fa commit eb41f334589d66b9da6f2b1acf7963ef8ca8d94e upstream. The assumption that lead to commit 5e5da1e9fbee ("pwm: ab8500: Explicitly allocate pwm chip base dynamically") was wrong: The pwm-ab8500 devices are not directly instantiated from device tree, but from the ab8500 mfd driver. So the pdev->id isn't -1, but a number between 1 and 3. Now that pwmchip ids are always allocated dynamically, this cannot easily be reverted. Introduce a new member in the driver data struct that tracks the hardware id and use this to calculate the register offset. Side-note: Using chip->base to calculate the offset was never robust because if there was already a PWM with id 1 at the time ab8500-pwm.1 was probed, the associated pwmchip would get assigned chip->base = 2 (or something bigger). Fixes: 5e5da1e9fbee ("pwm: ab8500: Explicitly allocate pwm chip base dynamically") Fixes: 6173f8f4ed9c ("pwm: Move AB8500 PWM driver to PWM framework") Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> 
commit eb41f334589d66b9da6f2b1acf7963ef8ca8d94e upstream.

The assumption that lead to commit 5e5da1e9fbee ("pwm: ab8500:
Explicitly allocate pwm chip base dynamically") was wrong: The
pwm-ab8500 devices are not directly instantiated from device tree, but
from the ab8500 mfd driver. So the pdev->id isn't -1, but a number
between 1 and 3. Now that pwmchip ids are always allocated dynamically,
this cannot easily be reverted.

Introduce a new member in the driver data struct that tracks the
hardware id and use this to calculate the register offset.

Side-note: Using chip->base to calculate the offset was never robust
because if there was already a PWM with id 1 at the time ab8500-pwm.1
was probed, the associated pwmchip would get assigned chip->base = 2 (or
something bigger).

Fixes: 5e5da1e9fbee ("pwm: ab8500: Explicitly allocate pwm chip base dynamically")
Fixes: 6173f8f4ed9c ("pwm: Move AB8500 PWM driver to PWM framework")
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
pwm: ep93xx: Ensure configuring period and duty_cycle isn't wrongly skipped 2021-07-08T14:09:30+00:00 Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de 2021-07-01T08:27:55+00:00 f4a8e31ed84ec646c158824f423cb22d1f362bbf As the last call to ep93xx_pwm_apply() might have exited early if state->enabled was false, the values for period and duty_cycle stored in pwm->state might not have been written to hardware and it must be ensured that they are configured before enabling the PWM. Fixes: 6d45374af539 ("pwm: ep93xx: Implement .apply callback") Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> 
As the last call to ep93xx_pwm_apply() might have exited early if
state->enabled was false, the values for period and duty_cycle stored in
pwm->state might not have been written to hardware and it must be
ensured that they are configured before enabling the PWM.

Fixes: 6d45374af539 ("pwm: ep93xx: Implement .apply callback")
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
pwm: berlin: Ensure configuring period and duty_cycle isn't wrongly skipped 2021-07-08T14:09:17+00:00 Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de 2021-07-01T08:27:54+00:00 7d6d4aaf2809f209c7d6bcab2f9ae76797051cfa As the last call to berlin_pwm_apply() might have exited early if state->enabled was false, the values for period and duty_cycle stored in pwm->state might not have been written to hardware and it must be ensured that they are configured before enabling the PWM. Fixes: 30dffb42fcd4 ("pwm: berlin: Implement .apply() callback") Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> 
As the last call to berlin_pwm_apply() might have exited early if
state->enabled was false, the values for period and duty_cycle stored in
pwm->state might not have been written to hardware and it must be
ensured that they are configured before enabling the PWM.

Fixes: 30dffb42fcd4 ("pwm: berlin: Implement .apply() callback")
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
pwm: tiecap: Ensure configuring period and duty_cycle isn't wrongly skipped 2021-07-08T14:08:54+00:00 Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de 2021-07-01T08:27:53+00:00 25f70b8f3d15b8c188ecb49c6007b86f3e775c20 As the last call to ecap_pwm_apply() might have exited early if state->enabled was false, the values for period and duty_cycle stored in pwm->state might not have been written to hardware and it must be ensured that they are configured before enabling the PWM. Fixes: 0ca7acd84766 ("pwm: tiecap: Implement .apply() callback") Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> 
As the last call to ecap_pwm_apply() might have exited early if
state->enabled was false, the values for period and duty_cycle stored in
pwm->state might not have been written to hardware and it must be
ensured that they are configured before enabling the PWM.

Fixes: 0ca7acd84766 ("pwm: tiecap: Implement .apply() callback")
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
pwm: spear: Ensure configuring period and duty_cycle isn't wrongly skipped 2021-07-08T14:08:38+00:00 Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de 2021-07-01T08:27:52+00:00 fe8255f80b8617bc67a58f4ca2b54b3b9b32ff84 As the last call to spear_pwm_apply() might have exited early if state->enabled was false, the values for period and duty_cycle stored in pwm->state might not have been written to hardware and it must be ensured that they are configured before enabling the PWM. Fixes: 98761ce4b91b ("pwm: spear: Implement .apply() callback") Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> 
As the last call to spear_pwm_apply() might have exited early if
state->enabled was false, the values for period and duty_cycle stored in
pwm->state might not have been written to hardware and it must be
ensured that they are configured before enabling the PWM.

Fixes: 98761ce4b91b ("pwm: spear: Implement .apply() callback")
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>