Hi Boris, ? 2017/8/2 16:59, Boris Brezillon ??: > Actually, when I suggested to just implement ->apply_state() and be > done with all other fields I was thinking that you could get rid of > this rockchip_pwm_data struct entirely and just have 3 different > pwm_ops. You seem to take the other direction here: you're removing > rockchip_pwm_ops_v1 and renaming rockchip_pwm_ops_v2 into > rockchip_pwm_ops. Yes, i really didn't understand exactly what you mean. Your mean is that remove the set_enable, get_state and other hooks, then use the pwm_ops instead of them, which has 3 different version, and implement the pwm_ops's functions like apply(), enable(), get_state() and others...?
