On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 02:17:18PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > 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)? Wouldn't this work automatically as part of the pwm_apply_args() helper if we extended it with this setting? Thierry
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
