On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 04:21:13PM +0100, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Hi Robert, > > Nice to make the pwms accessible from the command line, but shouldn't > > this be in the core? From what I see all we have to do is to add > > duty_ns and period_ns to struct pwm_chip. > > I thought it over twice. > > If the set_duty_ns(), set_period_ns() and set_enable() are transfered to the > core, I'll have to link the device and pwm_chip : > - expand pwmadd_chip() : should be expanded with the "struct device_d *dev" > parameter > - provide a way to link *dev with *pwm_chip > => either store device_d pointer into pwm_device structure, and go through the > list of all PWMs at each set_X() calls > => or use dev->priv (bad idea since the driver, ie. pxa_pwm wants to do that) > > This way, calling set_X(struct device_d *dev, ...) will find pwm_chip pointer > from dev, and call the approriate pwm_config(), ... > > So it's a bit more that adding duty_ns and period_ns to struct pwm_chip. Is this > what you want ? Oh, yes, you are right. You have to add a struct device_d * to struct pwm_chip. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
