On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 08:54:00AM +0200, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 3/31/20 8:10 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 04:57:13PM +0200, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> >> From: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> Use pwm_apply_state we can avoid having to store PWM state in the
> >> instance structure and in future we have an easy way to support new
> >> parameters like inverted duty cycle.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/video/backlight-pwm.c | 13 ++++++++-----
> >> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight-pwm.c b/drivers/video/backlight-pwm.c
> >> index 9111a42d7544..8b6494dac929 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/video/backlight-pwm.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/video/backlight-pwm.c
> >> @@ -33,7 +33,6 @@ struct pwm_backlight {
> >> struct backlight_device backlight;
> >> struct pwm_device *pwm;
> >> struct regulator *power;
> >> - uint32_t period;
> >> unsigned int *levels;
> >> int enable_gpio;
> >> int enable_active_high;
> >> @@ -91,13 +90,16 @@ static int backlight_pwm_disable(struct pwm_backlight *pwm_backlight)
> >> static int compute_duty_cycle(struct pwm_backlight *pwm_backlight, int brightness)
> >> {
> >> int duty_cycle;
> >> + struct pwm_state state;
> >> +
> >> + pwm_get_state(pwm_backlight->pwm, &state);
> >>
> >> if (pwm_backlight->levels)
> >> duty_cycle = pwm_backlight->levels[brightness];
> >> else
> >> duty_cycle = brightness;
> >>
> >> - return duty_cycle * pwm_backlight->period / pwm_backlight->scale;
> >> + return duty_cycle * state.period_ns / pwm_backlight->scale;
> >> }
> >>
> >> static int backlight_pwm_set(struct backlight_device *backlight,
> >> @@ -105,9 +107,11 @@ static int backlight_pwm_set(struct backlight_device *backlight,
> >> {
> >> struct pwm_backlight *pwm_backlight = container_of(backlight,
> >> struct pwm_backlight, backlight);
> >> + struct pwm_state state;
> >>
> >> - pwm_config(pwm_backlight->pwm, compute_duty_cycle(pwm_backlight, brightness),
> >> - pwm_backlight->period);
> >> + pwm_get_state(pwm_backlight->pwm, &state);
> >
> > You read the current pwm state here...
> >
> >> + state.duty_ns = compute_duty_cycle(pwm_backlight, brightness);
> >
> > and once again in compute_duty_cycle(). I think it would be nicer to
> > reorganize this a bit, maybe pass the state to compute_duty_cycle.
> >
> >> + pwm_apply_state(pwm_backlight->pwm, &state);
> >>
> >> if (brightness)
> >> return backlight_pwm_enable(pwm_backlight);
> >
> > I would assume that if you switch to the pwm_apply_state API then you do
> > it entirely. backlight_pwm_enable() still uses the old API to enable the
> > PWM.
>
> Ineed. Rest of patches should apply and build cleanly without this and the last one.
> If they're ok, can you apply them and I respin only those two?
Just did that.
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
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
