On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 04:22:25PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> In case the PWM LPSS module is not provided, allow users to be
> compiled with a help of a pwm_lpss_probe() stub.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/linux/platform_data/x86/pwm-lpss.h | 11 +++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/platform_data/x86/pwm-lpss.h b/include/linux/platform_data/x86/pwm-lpss.h
> index 296bd837ddbb..c868b396ed2c 100644
> --- a/include/linux/platform_data/x86/pwm-lpss.h
> +++ b/include/linux/platform_data/x86/pwm-lpss.h
> @@ -4,6 +4,8 @@
> #ifndef __PLATFORM_DATA_X86_PWM_LPSS_H
> #define __PLATFORM_DATA_X86_PWM_LPSS_H
>
> +#include <linux/err.h>
> +#include <linux/kconfig.h>
> #include <linux/types.h>
>
> struct device;
> @@ -27,7 +29,16 @@ struct pwm_lpss_boardinfo {
> bool other_devices_aml_touches_pwm_regs;
> };
>
> +#if IS_REACHABLE(CONFIG_PWM_LPSS)
> struct pwm_lpss_chip *pwm_lpss_probe(struct device *dev, void __iomem *base,
> const struct pwm_lpss_boardinfo *info);
> +#else
> +static inline
> +struct pwm_lpss_chip *pwm_lpss_probe(struct device *dev, void __iomem *base,
> + const struct pwm_lpss_boardinfo *info)
> +{
> + return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
Would it be more consistent to return the same value as the pwmchip_add
stub does?
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
