From: "Kumar, Udit" <u-kumar1@ti.com>
To: "Gokul Praveen" <g-praveen@ti.com>,
"Uwe Kleine-König" <ukleinek@kernel.org>
Cc: "Rafael V. Volkmer" <rafael.v.volkmer@gmail.com>,
<j-keerthy@ti.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org>, <n-francis@ti.com>,
<u-kumar1@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] pwm: tiehrpwm: Enable EHRPWM controller before setting configuration
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 10:50:06 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <85d941a6-9c57-45f3-ab6a-33ca91cf05a5@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <575bfd8e-9246-4acf-ba76-8d5a84689643@ti.com>
Hello Gokul,
On 1/9/2026 11:21 AM, Gokul Praveen wrote:
> Hi Uwe,
>
>
> On 08/01/26 23:40, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
>> Hello Gokul,
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 08, 2026 at 12:10:35PM +0530, Gokul Praveen wrote:
>>> On 08/01/26 01:17, Rafael V. Volkmer wrote:
>>>> Thanks for CC'ing me on this thread.
>>>>
>>>> On 07/01/26 15:21, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
>>>>> adding Rafael to Cc: who sent a patch series for this driver that I
>>>>> didn't come around to review yet. Given that neither he nor me
>>>>> noticed
>>>>> the problem addressed in this patch I wonder if it applies to all
>>>>> hardware variants.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I also didn't observe the issue described here in my testing: duty
>>>> cycle and
>>>> period changes always appeared to take effect as expected.
>>>>
>>>> My tests were done on an AM623 EVM.
>>>>
>>>> One possible explanation is that my test flow mostly exercised
>>>> configuration
>>>> while the PWM was already enabled/active, which could mask the
>>>> effect of a
>>>> put_sync/reset happening after configuration.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, this is the reason why the configuration was taking effect for
>>> you ,
>>> Rafael, as the PWM was already enabled when setting the
>>> configuration hence
>>> masking the effect of a put_sync/reset happening after configuration.
>>
>> Can you provide a list of commands that show the failure? That would
>> result in less guessing for me. My plan is to reproduce the failure
>> tomorrow to better understand it on my boneblack.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Uwe
>
> Sure Uwe. These are the commands I have tried for PWM signal generation:
>
> cd /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0
> /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0# echo 0 > export
> /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0# cd pwm0/
> /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0/pwm0# echo 10000000 > period
> /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0/pwm0# echo 3000000 > duty_cycle
> /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0/pwm0# echo "normal" > polarity
> /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0/pwm0# echo 1 > enable
>
> Once these commands were executed, I measured the PWM signal using
> logic analyzer and the duty cycle was 100% even though we had set 30%
> duty cycle through the sysfs nodes.
>
> However, with the below command sequence, the duty cycle was getting
> set properly
>
> cd /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0
> /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0# echo 0 > export
> /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0# cd pwm0/
> /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0/pwm0# echo 10000000 > period
> /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0/pwm0# echo 3000000 > duty_cycle
> /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0/pwm0# echo "normal" > polarity
> /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0/pwm0# echo 1 > enable
> /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0/pwm0# echo 3000000 > duty_cycle
I don't think , this last call of setting duty_cycle , even will land in
driver code .
>
>
> PWM is working only if we re-update the duty cycle after enabling the
> module.
>
> If we do not re-update the duty cycle after enabling the module then
> PWM signal line is being high(100 % duty) always.
>
> Test Environment: TI J784S4 EVM board.
>
> Best Regards
> Gokul Praveen
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-15 5:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-07 5:53 Gokul Praveen
2026-01-07 9:51 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2026-01-07 10:23 ` Gokul Praveen
2026-01-07 19:47 ` Rafael V. Volkmer
2026-01-08 6:40 ` Gokul Praveen
2026-01-08 18:10 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2026-01-09 5:51 ` Gokul Praveen
2026-01-09 22:53 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2026-01-12 5:51 ` Gokul Praveen
2026-01-12 7:22 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2026-01-19 15:00 ` Kumar, Udit
2026-01-19 21:33 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2026-01-20 4:40 ` Kumar, Udit
2026-01-20 5:53 ` Gokul Praveen
2026-01-20 8:23 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2026-01-20 8:34 ` Gokul Praveen
2026-01-15 10:32 ` Gokul Praveen
2026-01-15 17:17 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2026-01-16 8:41 ` Gokul Praveen
2026-01-16 9:10 ` Gokul Praveen
2026-01-19 2:55 ` Rafael V. Volkmer
2026-01-19 6:48 ` Gokul Praveen
2026-01-15 5:20 ` Kumar, Udit [this message]
2026-01-15 6:14 ` Gokul Praveen
2026-01-15 7:46 ` Kumar, Udit
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=85d941a6-9c57-45f3-ab6a-33ca91cf05a5@ti.com \
--to=u-kumar1@ti.com \
--cc=g-praveen@ti.com \
--cc=j-keerthy@ti.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=n-francis@ti.com \
--cc=rafael.v.volkmer@gmail.com \
--cc=ukleinek@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®