[Uboot-stm32] [PATCH 1/5] dm: pwm: Check if duty_ns is lower than period_ns

[Cheick TRAORE]

On 3/10/25 13:35, Patrice CHOTARD wrote:
>
> On 3/10/25 11:00, Patrice CHOTARD wrote:
>>
>> On 3/6/25 15:13, Patrice CHOTARD wrote:
>>>
>>> On 3/6/25 11:56, Cheick Traore wrote:
>>>> It was possible to provide a duty_ns greater than period_ns to
>>>> "pwm config" command. The framework must check the values before
>>>> providing them to drivers.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Cheick Traore<cheick.traore at foss.st.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>>   drivers/pwm/pwm-uclass.c | 3 +++
>>>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-uclass.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-uclass.c
>>>> index 6543db1d623..b4491f7dcd4 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-uclass.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-uclass.c
>>>> @@ -27,6 +27,9 @@ int pwm_set_config(struct udevice *dev, uint channel, uint period_ns,
>>>>   	if (!ops->set_config)
>>>>   		return -ENOSYS;
>>>>   
>>>> +	if (duty_ns > period_ns)
>>>> +		return -EINVAL;
>>>> +
>>>>   	return ops->set_config(dev, channel, period_ns, duty_ns);
>>>>   }
>>>>   
>>> Reviewed-by: Patrice Chotard<patrice.chotard at foss.st.com>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Patrice
>> Applied to u-boot-stm32/next
>>
>> Thanks
>> Patrice
>
> Hi Cheick
>
> Unfortunately, this patch is causing U-Boot CI test failed:
> seehttps://source.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-stm/-/jobs/1054426
>
> More precisely ut_dm_dm_test_cros_ec_pwm, see test/dm/cros_ec_pwm.c
>
> Either update test/dm/cros_ec_pwm.c or another solution is simply to
> clamp duty_ns to period_ns as following ?
>
>   +	if (duty_ns > period_ns)
>   +		duty_ns = period_ns;
>   +
>
> Patrice
>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Uboot-stm32 mailing list
>> Uboot-stm32 at st-md-mailman.stormreply.com
>> https://st-md-mailman.stormreply.com/mailman/listinfo/uboot-stm32

Hi Patrice,

It seems like this patch should finally be reverted.

When the duty cycle exceeds the period, some drivers already clamp the 
value of the duty cycle to the maximum value or do not apply the duty cycle.

So, I will check the duty cycle in|drivers/pwm/pwm-stm32.c|and 
return|-EINVAL|when it exceeds the period.

Thanks,

Cheick