On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:49:04 +0200 Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:03:38PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > The PWM state, represented by its period, duty_cycle and polarity, > > is currently directly stored in the PWM device. > > Declare a pwm_state structure embedding those field so that we can later > > use this struct to atomically update all the PWM parameters at once. > > > > All pwm_get_xxx() helpers are now implemented as wrappers around > > pwm_get_state(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/pwm/core.c | 8 ++++---- > > include/linux/pwm.h | 54 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ > > 2 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/core.c b/drivers/pwm/core.c > > index 6433059..f3f91e7 100644 > > --- a/drivers/pwm/core.c > > +++ b/drivers/pwm/core.c > > @@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ int pwmchip_add_with_polarity(struct pwm_chip *chip, > > pwm->chip = chip; > > pwm->pwm = chip->base + i; > > pwm->hwpwm = i; > > - pwm->polarity = polarity; > > + pwm->state.polarity = polarity; > > Would this not more correctly be assigned to pwm->args.polarity? After > all this is setting up the "initial" state, much like DT or the lookup > tables would for duty cycle and period. Yes, I wasn't sure about the pwm_add_with_polarity() meaning. To me, all the reference info should be extracted from DT, PWM lookup table or driver specific ->request() implementation, but I can definitely initialize the args.polarity here too. Should I keep the pwm->state.polarity assignment (to set the initial polarity when the driver does not support hardware readout)? -- Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
