pwm: lpc32xx: fix and simplify duty cycle and period calculations
The change fixes a problem, if duty_ns is too small in comparison
to period_ns (as a valid corner case duty_ns is 0 ns), then due to
PWM_DUTY() macro applied on a value the result is overflowed over 8
bits, and instead of the highest bitfield duty cycle value 0xff the
invalid duty cycle bitfield value 0x00 is written.
For reference the LPC32xx spec defines PWMx_DUTY bitfield description
is this way and it seems to be correct:
[Low]/[High] = [PWM_DUTY]/[256-PWM_DUTY], where 0 < PWM_DUTY <= 255.
In addition according to my oscilloscope measurements LPC32xx PWM is
"tristate" in sense that it produces a wave with floating min/max
voltage levels for different duty cycle values, for corner cases:
PWM_DUTY == 0x01 => signal is in range from -1.05v to 0v
....
PWM_DUTY == 0x80 => signal is in range from -0.75v to +0.75v
....
PWM_DUTY == 0xff => signal is in range from 0v to +1.05v
PWM_DUTY == 0x00 => signal is around 0v, PWM is off
Due to this peculiarity on very long period ranges (less than 1KHz)
and odd pre-divider values PWM generated wave does not remind a
clock shape signal, but rather a heartbit shape signal with positive
and negative peaks, so I would recommend to use high-speed HCLK clock
as a PWM parent clock and avoid using RTC clock as a parent.
The change corrects PWM output in corner cases and prevents any
possible overflows in calculation of values for PWM_DUTY and
PWM_RELOADV bitfields, thus helper macro definitions may be removed.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vz@mleia.com>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
1 file changed