> > +static void fsl_pwm_free(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device
> > +*pwm) {
> > + struct fsl_pwm_chip *fpc;
> > + struct fsl_pwm_data *pwm_data;
> > +
> > + fpc = to_fsl_chip(chip);
> > +
> > + pwm_data = pwm_get_chip_data(pwm);
> > + if (!pwm_data)
> > + return;
>
> THis check seems unnecessary.
>
But if do not check it here, I must check it in the following code.
> > +
> > + if (pwm_data->available != FSL_AVAILABLE)
> > + return;
> > +
So the ' struct fsl_pwm_data' may be removed in the future.
>
> > +
> > +
> > + pwm_data->period_cycles = period_cycles;
> > + pwm_data->duty_cycles = duty_cycles;
>
> These fields are set but never read. Please drop them.
>
> If you drop the 'available' field also the you can drop chip_data
> completely.
>
I think I may move the 'available' field to the PWM driver data struct.
> > +
> > + writel(FTMCnSC_MSB | FTMCnSC_ELSB, fpc->base + FTM_CSC(pwm->hwpwm));
> > +
> > + writel(0xF0, fpc->base + FTM_OUTMASK);
> > + writel(0x0F, fpc->base + FTM_OUTINIT);
> > + writel(FTM_CNTIN_VAL, fpc->base + FTM_CNTIN);
> > +
> > + writel(period_cycles + cntin - 1, fpc->base + FTM_MOD);
> > + writel(duty_cycles + cntin, fpc->base + FTM_CV(pwm->hwpwm));
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int fsl_pwm_set_polarity(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct
> pwm_device *pwm,
> > + enum pwm_polarity polarity)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long reg;
> > + struct fsl_pwm_data *pwm_data;
> > + struct fsl_pwm_chip *fpc;
> > +
> > + fpc = to_fsl_chip(chip);
> > +
> > + pwm_data = pwm_get_chip_data(pwm);
> > + if (!pwm_data)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + if (pwm_data->available != FSL_AVAILABLE)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + reg = readl(fpc->base + FTM_POL);
> > + reg &= ~BIT(pwm->hwpwm);
>
> Either drop this line...
>
This is just for unmasking this bit field.
Here it's not needed, so I will revise it.
> > + if (polarity == PWM_POLARITY_INVERSED)
> > + reg |= BIT(pwm->hwpwm);
> > + else
> > + reg &= ~BIT(pwm->hwpwm);
>
> ...or this one
>
> > +static int fsl_pwm_enable(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device
> > +*pwm) {
> > + int ret;
> > + struct fsl_pwm_chip *fpc;
> > + struct pinctrl_state *pins_state;
> > + struct fsl_pwm_data *pwm_data;
> > + const char *statename;
> > +
> > + fpc = to_fsl_chip(chip);
> > +
> > + pwm_data = pwm_get_chip_data(pwm);
> > + if (!pwm_data)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + if (pwm_data->available != FSL_AVAILABLE)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + statename = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "ch%d-active", pwm->hwpwm);
>
> You loose memory here and in fsl_pwm_disable aswell.
>
Yes, I will revise it.
> > + pins_state = pinctrl_lookup_state(fpc->pinctrl,
> > + statename);
> > + /* enable pins to be muxed in and configured */
> > + if (!IS_ERR(pins_state)) {
> > + ret = pinctrl_select_state(fpc->pinctrl, pins_state);
> > + if (ret)
> > + dev_warn(chip->dev, "could not set default pins\n");
> > + } else
> > + dev_warn(chip->dev, "could not get default pinstate\n");
>
> Either it's ok to do without pinctrl or it's not ok, so either return an
> error or drop the warnings. Polluting the kernel log with such messages
> from a frequently called function is not a good idea.
>
Well, I will just print out some error logs and return the error.
--
Best Regards.
Xiubo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
