linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] pwm: rockchip: Added to support for RK3288 SoC

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

Date:	Thu, 7 Aug 2014 15:14:44 +0200
From:	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
To:	caesar <caesar.wang@...k-chips.com>
Cc:	heiko@...ech.de, b.galvani@...il.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
	ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk, rdunlap@...radead.org,
	galak@...eaurora.org, cf@...k-chips.com, huangtao@...k-chips.com,
	xjq@...k-chips.com, addy.ke@...k-chips.com, cjf@...k-chips.com,
	hj@...k-chips.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] pwm: rockchip: Added to support for RK3288 SoC

On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 09:04:30PM +0800, caesar wrote:
[...]
> As you say, I will rewrite the about if it's really need  do so it.
> For example:
> 
> static const struct rockchip_pwm_data pwm_data_v1 = {
>     .regs = {
>                 .duty = 0x04,
>                 .period = 0x08,
>                 .cntr = 0x00,
>                 .ctrl = 0x0c,
>     },
>     .prescaler = 2,
>     .set_enable = rockchip_pwm_set_enable_v1,
> };
> 
> static const struct rockchip_pwm_data pwm_data_v2 = {
>     .regs = {
>                 .duty = 0x08,
>                 .period = 0x04,
>                 .cntr = 0x00,
>                 .ctrl = 0x0c,
>     },
>     .prescaler = 1,
>     .set_enable = rockchip_pwm_set_enable_v2,
> };
> 
> static const struct rockchip_pwm_data pwm_data_vop = {
>     .regs = {
>                 .duty = 0x08,
>                 .period = 0x04,
>                 .cntr = 0x0c,
>                 .ctrl = 0x00,
>     },
>     .prescaler = 1,
>     .set_enable = rockchip_pwm_set_enable_v2,
> };
> 
> Is that right?

Yes.

> >>+	.set_enable = rockchip_pwm_set_enable_v2,
> >>+};
> >No need for the double indirection.
> 
> Sorry, I think is need if you mean a double indirection for ".set_enable".

The "double indirection" was regarding the symbolic names for registers,
not the .set_enable(). Sorry.

Thierry

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped