While driving a PWM via the sysfs API it's hard to determine the right
order of writes to the pseudo files "period" and "duty_cycle":
If you want to go from duty_cycle/period = 50/100 to 150/300 you have to
write period first (because 150/100 is invalid). If however you start at
400/500 the duty_cycle must be configured first. The rule that works is:
If you increase period write period first, otherwise write duty_cycle
first. A complication however is that it's usually sensible to configure
the polarity before both period and duty_cycle. This can only be done if
the current state's duty_cycle and period configuration isn't bogus
though. It is still worse (but I think only theoretic) if you have a PWM
that only supports inverted polarity and you start with period = 0 and
polarity = normal. Then you can change neither period (because polarity
= normal is refused) nor polarity (because there is still period = 0).
To simplify the corner cases for userspace, let invalid target states
pass if the current state is invalid already.
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240628103519.105020-2-u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@kernel.org>
}
}
+static bool pwm_state_valid(const struct pwm_state *state)
+{
+ /*
+ * For a disabled state all other state description is irrelevant and
+ * and supposed to be ignored. So also ignore any strange values and
+ * consider the state ok.
+ */
+ if (state->enabled)
+ return true;
+
+ if (!state->period)
+ return false;
+
+ if (state->duty_cycle > state->period)
+ return false;
+
+ return true;
+}
+
/**
* __pwm_apply() - atomically apply a new state to a PWM device
* @pwm: PWM device
struct pwm_chip *chip;
int err;
- if (!pwm || !state || !state->period ||
- state->duty_cycle > state->period)
+ if (!pwm || !state)
return -EINVAL;
+ if (!pwm_state_valid(state)) {
+ /*
+ * Allow to transition from one invalid state to another.
+ * This ensures that you can e.g. change the polarity while
+ * the period is zero. (This happens on stm32 when the hardware
+ * is in its poweron default state.) This greatly simplifies
+ * working with the sysfs API where you can only change one
+ * parameter at a time.
+ */
+ if (!pwm_state_valid(&pwm->state)) {
+ pwm->state = *state;
+ return 0;
+ }
+
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
chip = pwm->chip;
if (state->period == pwm->state.period &&