[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1464296730-121773-1-git-send-email-briannorris@chromium.org>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 14:05:30 -0700
From: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Cc: linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
Subject: [PATCH] pwm: don't allow duty cycle higher than period
It doesn't make sense to allow the duty cycle to be larger than the
period. I can see this behavior by, e.g.:
# echo 1 > /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0/export
# cat /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0/pwm1/period
100
# echo 101 > /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0/pwm1/duty_cycle
[... driver may or may not reject the value, or trigger some logic bug ...]
It's better to see:
# echo 1 > /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0/export
# cat /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0/pwm1/period
100
# echo 101 > /sys/class/pwm/pwmchip0/pwm1/duty_cycle
-bash: echo: write error: Invalid argument
Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
---
drivers/pwm/core.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/pwm/core.c b/drivers/pwm/core.c
index dba3843c53b8..9246b60f894a 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/core.c
+++ b/drivers/pwm/core.c
@@ -463,6 +463,9 @@ int pwm_apply_state(struct pwm_device *pwm, struct pwm_state *state)
if (!memcmp(state, &pwm->state, sizeof(*state)))
return 0;
+ if (state->duty_cycle > state->period)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
if (pwm->chip->ops->apply) {
err = pwm->chip->ops->apply(pwm->chip, pwm, state);
if (err)
--
2.8.0.rc3.226.g39d4020
Powered by blists - more mailing lists