On Wed, 2 Aug 2017 19:31:57 +0800
"David.Wu" <david.wu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Boris,
>
> 在 2017/8/2 16:59, Boris Brezillon 写道:
> > Actually, when I suggested to just implement ->apply_state() and be
> > done with all other fields I was thinking that you could get rid of
> > this rockchip_pwm_data struct entirely and just have 3 different
> > pwm_ops. You seem to take the other direction here: you're removing
> > rockchip_pwm_ops_v1 and renaming rockchip_pwm_ops_v2 into
> > rockchip_pwm_ops.
>
> Yes, i really didn't understand exactly what you mean.
> Your mean is that remove the set_enable, get_state and other hooks,
> then use the pwm_ops instead of them, which has 3 different version, and
> implement the pwm_ops's functions like apply(), enable(), get_state()
> and others...?
>
Yep, just define 3 different pwm_ops (one for each IP), each of them
implementing ->apply() and ->get_state() and that's all.
Something like:
static const struct pwm_ops rockchip_pwm_ops_v1 = {
.get_state = rockchip_pwm_v1_get_state,
.apply = rockchip_pwm_v1_apply,
.owner = THIS_MODULE,
};
static const struct pwm_ops rockchip_pwm_ops_v2 = {
.get_state = rockchip_pwm_v2_get_state,
.apply = rockchip_pwm_v2_apply,
.owner = THIS_MODULE,
};
static const struct pwm_ops rockchip_pwm_ops_vop = {
.get_state = rockchip_pwm_vop_get_state,
.apply = rockchip_pwm_vop_apply,
.owner = THIS_MODULE,
};
static const struct of_device_id rockchip_pwm_dt_ids[] = {
{ .compatible = "rockchip,rk2928-pwm", .data = &rockchip_pwm_ops_v1 },
{ .compatible = "rockchip,rk3288-pwm", .data = &rockchip_pwm_ops_v2 },
{ .compatible = "rockchip,vop-pwm", .data = &rockchip_pwm_ops_vop },
{ /* sentinel */ }
};
MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, rockchip_pwm_dt_ids);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
