On Sat, Nov 18, 2023 at 04:16:17PM +0000, Sean Young wrote: > In order to introduce a pwm api which can be used from atomic context, > we will need two functions for applying pwm changes: > > int pwm_apply_cansleep(struct pwm *, struct pwm_state *); > int pwm_apply_atomic(struct pwm *, struct pwm_state *); > > This commit just deals with renaming pwm_apply_state(), a following > commit will introduce the pwm_apply_atomic() function. Sorry, I still don't agree with that _cansleep suffix. I think it's the wrong terminology. Just because something can sleep doesn't mean that it ever will. "Might sleep" is much more accurate because it says exactly what might happen and indicates what we're guarding against. Thierry
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
