On 27.02.2018 17:38, Daniel Thompson wrote: > On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 01:40:58PM +0200, Claudiu Beznea wrote: >> On 27.02.2018 12:54, Daniel Thompson wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 04:24:15PM +0200, Claudiu Beznea wrote: >>>> On 26.02.2018 11:57, Jani Nikula wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 22 Feb 2018, Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 02:01:16PM +0200, Claudiu Beznea wrote: >>>>>>> Add PWM mode to pwm_config() function. The drivers which uses pwm_config() >>>>>>> were adapted to this change. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> arch/arm/mach-s3c24xx/mach-rx1950.c | 11 +++++++++-- >>>>>>> drivers/bus/ts-nbus.c | 2 +- >>>>>>> drivers/clk/clk-pwm.c | 3 ++- >>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_panel.c | 17 ++++++++++++++--- >>>>>>> drivers/hwmon/pwm-fan.c | 2 +- >>>>>>> drivers/input/misc/max77693-haptic.c | 2 +- >>>>>>> drivers/input/misc/max8997_haptic.c | 6 +++++- >>>>>>> drivers/leds/leds-pwm.c | 5 ++++- >>>>>>> drivers/media/rc/ir-rx51.c | 5 ++++- >>>>>>> drivers/media/rc/pwm-ir-tx.c | 5 ++++- >>>>>>> drivers/video/backlight/lm3630a_bl.c | 4 +++- >>>>>>> drivers/video/backlight/lp855x_bl.c | 4 +++- >>>>>>> drivers/video/backlight/lp8788_bl.c | 5 ++++- >>>>>>> drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c | 11 +++++++++-- >>>>>>> drivers/video/fbdev/ssd1307fb.c | 3 ++- >>>>>>> include/linux/pwm.h | 6 ++++-- >>>>>>> 16 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/lm3630a_bl.c b/drivers/video/backlight/lm3630a_bl.c >>>>>>> index 2030a6b77a09..696fa25dafd2 100644 >>>>>>> --- a/drivers/video/backlight/lm3630a_bl.c >>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/video/backlight/lm3630a_bl.c >>>>>>> @@ -165,8 +165,10 @@ static void lm3630a_pwm_ctrl(struct lm3630a_chip *pchip, int br, int br_max) >>>>>>> { >>>>>>> unsigned int period = pchip->pdata->pwm_period; >>>>>>> unsigned int duty = br * period / br_max; >>>>>>> + struct pwm_caps caps = { }; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - pwm_config(pchip->pwmd, duty, period); >>>>>>> + pwm_get_caps(pchip->pwmd->chip, pchip->pwmd, &caps); >>>>>>> + pwm_config(pchip->pwmd, duty, period, BIT(ffs(caps.modes) - 1)); >>>>>> >>>>>> Well... I admit I've only really looked at the patches that impact >>>>>> backlight but dispersing this really odd looking bit twiddling >>>>>> throughout the kernel doesn't strike me a great API design. >>>>>> >>>>>> IMHO callers should not be required to find the first set bit in >>>>>> some specially crafted set of capability bits simply to get sane >>>>>> default behaviour. >>>>> >>>>> Agreed. IMHO the regular use case becomes rather tedious, ugly, and >>>>> error prone. >>>> >>>> Using simply PWM_MODE(NORMAL) instead of BIT(ffs(caps.modes) - 1) would be OK >>>> from your side? >>>> >>>> Or, what about using a function like pwm_mode_first() to get the first supported >>>> mode by PWM channel? >>>> >>>> Or, would you prefer to solve this inside pwm_config() function, let's say, in >>>> case an invalid mode is passed as argument, to let pwm_config() to choose the >>>> first available PWM mode for PWM channel passed as argument? >>> >>> What is it that actually needs solving? >>> >>> If a driver requests normal mode and the PWM driver cannot support it >>> why not just return an error an move on. >> Because, simply, I wasn't aware of what these PWM client drivers needs for. > > I'm afraid you have confused me here. > > Didn't you just *add* the whole concept of PWM caps with your patches? > How could any existing call site expect anything except normal mode. > Until now there has been no possiblity to request anything else. Agree. And agree I was confusing in previous email, sorry about that. And agree that there was nothing before and everything should work with PWM normal mode. When I choose to have BIT(ffs(caps.modes)) instead of PWM_MODE(NORMAL) I was thinking at having these pwm_config() calls working all the time having in mind that in future the PWM controllers that these drivers use, might change in terms of PWM supported modes. Thank you, Claudiu Beznea > > >>> Put another way, what is the use case for secretly adopting a mode the >>> caller didn't want? Under what circumstances is this a good thing? >> No one... But I wasn't aware of what the PWM clients needs for from their PWM >> controllers. At this moment having BIT(ffs(caps.modes)) instead of >> PWM_MODE(NORMAL) is mostly the same since all the driver that has not explicitly >> registered PWM caps will use PWM normal mode. >> >> I will use PWM_MODE(NORMAL) instead of this in all the cases if this is OK from >> your side. >> >> Thank you, >> Claudiu Beznea >>> >>> >>> Daniel. >>> > -- 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