Re: [PATCH 1/2] leds: Add driver for Qualcomm LPG

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > On 04/03/2017 09:00 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> [..]
> > > For the patterns I don't know how a trigger for this would look like,
> > > how would setting the pattern of a trigger be propagated down to the
> > > hardware?
> > 
> > We'd need a new op and API similar to blink_set()/led_blink_set().
> > 
> 
> I've tried to find different LED circuits with some sort of pattern
> generator in an attempt to figure out how to design this interface, but
> turned out to be quite hard to find examples; the three I can compare
> are:
> 
> * LP5xx series "implements" pattern generation by executing code.

It supports "linear" and "exponential" transitions between
values. Variable number of steps.

> * Qualcomm LPG iterates over 2-64 brightness-values in a pattern, at a
>   fixed rate with knobs to configure what happens before starting and
>   after finishing iterating over the defined values. It does not support
>   smooth transitions between values.
> 
> * AS3676 supports a pattern of 32 values controlling if the output
>   should be enabled or disabled for each 32.5ms (or 250ms) time period.
>   The delay before repeating the pattern can be configured. It support
>   smooth transitions between the states.

Ok, that's "really interesting" one. As far as I can see, the pattern
really should only contain justtwo intensities...

> So, while I think I see how you would like to architect this interface I
> am not sure how to figure out the details.
> 
> The pattern definition would have to be expressive enough to support the
> features of LP5xx and direct enough to support the limited AS3676. It
> would likely have to express transitions, so that the LPG could generate
> intermediate steps (and we will have to adapt the resolution of the
> ramps based on the other LPGs in the system).

That's why I believe it is important to present whole pattern engine
as one unit to the userspace. Userspace should always upload pattern
for _all_ the LEDs at once.

> How do we do with patterns that are implementable by the LP5xx but are
> not with the LPG? Should we reject those or should we do some sort of
> best-effort approach in the kernel?

Up to you, I guess. Both rejecting and best-effort make some sense.

OTOH if pattern is "(off, 0msec), (white, +1000msec), (off,
+0msec)"... you can't really do it "exactly" even on LP5xx, due to
non-trivial conversion between PWM and what user sees....

So on LPG you'd really do "(off, 0msec), (10% white, +100msec), (20%
white, +100msec), ..."

AS3676... I guess after we reject all patterns that have more than 0
and one specific brightness, we can use similar approximation we'd do
on LPG? 

> > This is what we have now, so we can live with it. Addition of a new
> > RGB trigger would be an improvement of the existing state.
> > 
> 
> If we do the brightness compensation (for e.g. white balance
> adjustments) in a trigger then there's added value.
> 
> The part where I see this affects the LPG driver is that the brightness
> of the patterns might have to be adjusted accordingly - which probably
> would be easier to implement if the kernel just exposed the compensation
> values to user space.

Well, compensation needs to happen "during the transitions",
too.
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature