On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 02:07:53PM +0100, Dimitri Fedrau wrote: > Am Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 09:52:51AM +0100 schrieb Uwe Kleine-König: > > `echo 0 > /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip3/pwm0/duty_cycle` should result in > > MC33XS2410_PWM_CTRL3 having MC33XS2410_PWM_CTRL3_EN(pwm->hwpwm) cleared. > > When mc33xs2410_pwm_get_state() is called then it returns state->enabled > > = false and in that case the above mentioned warning doesn't trigger. > > Yes, as you explained. But the warning is shown. > > > Where is the misunderstanding? > > if (state->enabled && state->duty_cycle < s2.duty_cycle) > dev_warn(pwmchip_parent(chip), > ".apply is supposed to round down duty_cycle (requested: %llu/%llu, applied: %llu/%llu)\n", > state->duty_cycle, state->period, > s2.duty_cycle, s2.period); > > state has previously applied settings and is parameter of pwm_apply_debug, > in that case s2=s1, and s1 is returned by get_state: > > state->enabled=true > state->duty_cycle=0 > s2.enabled=false > s2.duty_cycle=1908 > > Due to the code the warning should be raised. If it shouldn't the check > should be different, something like if (state->enabled && s2.enabled && > ...) This should be fixed with https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pwm/20241105153521.1001864-2-u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#u Test feedback and review very welcome. Best regards Uwe
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
