On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 02:29:35PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 11:51:44AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > To ease review this reuses the formerly implemented callbacks.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/pwm/pwm-tegra.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> > 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-tegra.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-tegra.c
> > index 11a10b575ace..1161c6323e60 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-tegra.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-tegra.c
> > @@ -227,10 +227,36 @@ static void tegra_pwm_disable(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm)
> > clk_disable_unprepare(pc->clk);
> > }
> >
> > +static int tegra_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
> > + const struct pwm_state *state)
> > +{
> > + int err;
> > +
> > + if (state->polarity != PWM_POLARITY_INVERSED)
> > + return -EINVAL;
>
> Where does this come from? I can't see this condition anywhere in the
> existing driver.
The old driver doesn't implement .set_polarity, so this condition
originates from
if (state->polarity != pwm->state.polarity) {
if (!chip->ops->set_polarity) {
err = -EINVAL;
goto out_err;
}
...
in the legacy code path in the core.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
