linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] pwm: add sysfs interface

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 8 Apr 2013 13:34:58 +0200
From:	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>
To:	Lars Poeschel <poeschel@...onage.de>
Cc:	Lars Poeschel <larsi@....tu-dresden.de>, rob@...dley.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] pwm: add sysfs interface

On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 01:15:37PM +0200, Lars Poeschel wrote:
[...]
> You mean change only while a PWM is disabled ?Ok, as said above, I need to be 
> able to change at least the duty cycle while the PWM is running without 
> having gaps. But prohibiting changes of the period could be done with 
> returning -EBUSY.

Okay, that sounds acceptable. duty-cycle should be the only value that
can be changed while a PWM is enabled. Obviously it should still return
-EINVAL if the duty-cycle is larger than the period, but the PWM core
will take care of that automatically.

By the way, would you mind elaborating a bit on the various use-cases
that you have? I'm interested in what people use the PWM subsystem for
and you seem to be the only one currently using it from userspace. I'm
hoping I can get a better understanding of what the PWM subsystem nedes
to provide if I know what people use it for.

Thierry

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped