[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190209171310.GF197782@dtor-ws>
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2019 09:13:10 -0800
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To: Paweł Chmiel <pawel.mikolaj.chmiel@...il.com>
Cc: linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] input: misc: pwm-vibra: Stop regulator after
disabling pwm, not before
On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 09:27:32PM +0100, Paweł Chmiel wrote:
> This patch fixes order of disable calls in pwm_vibrator_stop.
> Currently when starting device, we first enable vcc regulator and then
> setup and enable pwm. When stopping, we should do this in oposite order,
> so first disable pwm and then disable regulator.
> Previously order was the same as in start.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paweł Chmiel <pawel.mikolaj.chmiel@...il.com>
Applied, thank you.
> ---
> drivers/input/misc/pwm-vibra.c | 8 ++++----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/pwm-vibra.c b/drivers/input/misc/pwm-vibra.c
> index 9df87431d7d4..dbb6d9e1b947 100644
> --- a/drivers/input/misc/pwm-vibra.c
> +++ b/drivers/input/misc/pwm-vibra.c
> @@ -80,14 +80,14 @@ static int pwm_vibrator_start(struct pwm_vibrator *vibrator)
>
> static void pwm_vibrator_stop(struct pwm_vibrator *vibrator)
> {
> + if (vibrator->pwm_dir)
> + pwm_disable(vibrator->pwm_dir);
> + pwm_disable(vibrator->pwm);
> +
> if (vibrator->vcc_on) {
> regulator_disable(vibrator->vcc);
> vibrator->vcc_on = false;
> }
> -
> - if (vibrator->pwm_dir)
> - pwm_disable(vibrator->pwm_dir);
> - pwm_disable(vibrator->pwm);
> }
>
> static void pwm_vibrator_play_work(struct work_struct *work)
> --
> 2.17.1
>
--
Dmitry
Powered by blists - more mailing lists