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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2022 11:06:33 +0800 From: Song Chen <chensong_2000@....cn> To: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de> Cc: johan@...nel.org, elder@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, thierry.reding@...il.com, lee.jones@...aro.org, greybus-dev@...ts.linaro.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: greybus: introduce pwm_ops::apply 在 2022/2/10 18:03, Uwe Kleine-König 写道: > On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 05:05:02PM +0800, Song Chen wrote: >> Introduce apply in pwm_ops to replace legacy operations, >> like enable, disable, config and set_polarity. >> >> Signed-off-by: Song Chen <chensong_2000@....cn> >> --- >> drivers/staging/greybus/pwm.c | 46 +++++++++++++++-------------------- >> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/staging/greybus/pwm.c b/drivers/staging/greybus/pwm.c >> index 891a6a672378..e1889cf979b2 100644 >> --- a/drivers/staging/greybus/pwm.c >> +++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/pwm.c >> @@ -204,43 +204,35 @@ static void gb_pwm_free(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm) >> gb_pwm_deactivate_operation(pwmc, pwm->hwpwm); >> } >> >> -static int gb_pwm_config(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, >> - int duty_ns, int period_ns) >> -{ >> - struct gb_pwm_chip *pwmc = pwm_chip_to_gb_pwm_chip(chip); >> - >> - return gb_pwm_config_operation(pwmc, pwm->hwpwm, duty_ns, period_ns); >> -}; >> - >> -static int gb_pwm_set_polarity(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, >> - enum pwm_polarity polarity) >> +static int gb_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, >> + const struct pwm_state *state) >> { >> + int ret; >> struct gb_pwm_chip *pwmc = pwm_chip_to_gb_pwm_chip(chip); >> >> - return gb_pwm_set_polarity_operation(pwmc, pwm->hwpwm, polarity); >> -}; >> - >> -static int gb_pwm_enable(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm) >> -{ >> - struct gb_pwm_chip *pwmc = pwm_chip_to_gb_pwm_chip(chip); >> + /* set period and duty cycle*/ >> + ret = gb_pwm_config_operation(pwmc, pwm->hwpwm, state->duty_cycle, state->period); > > gb_pwm_config_operation's 3rd parameter is an u32, so you're loosing > bits here as state->duty_cycle is a u64. Ditto for period. originally, pwm_apply_state --> pwm_apply_legacy --> gb_pwm_config --> gb_pwm_config_operation is also loosing bits, does it mean greybus can live with that? Or redefine gb_pwm_config_request, switch duty and period to __le64? > > Also it would be nice if you go from > > .duty_cycle = A, .period = B, .enabled = 1 > > to > > .duty_cycle = C, .period = D, .enabled = 0 > > that C/D wasn't visible on the output pin. So please disable earlier > (but keep enable at the end). sorry, i don't quite understand this part, but is below code looking good to you? static int gb_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, const struct pwm_state *state) { int err; bool enabled = pwm->state.enabled; struct gb_pwm_chip *pwmc = pwm_chip_to_gb_pwm_chip(chip); /* set polarity */ if (state->polarity != pwm->state.polarity) { if (enabled) { gb_pwm_disable_operation(pwmc, pwm->hwpwm); enabled = false; } err = gb_pwm_set_polarity_operation(pwmc, pwm->hwpwm, state->polarity); if (err) return err; } if (!state->enabled) { if (enabled) gb_pwm_disable_operation(pwmc, pwm->hwpwm); return 0; } /* set period and duty cycle*/ err = gb_pwm_config_operation(pwmc, pwm->hwpwm, state->duty_cycle, state->period); if (err) return err; /* enable/disable */ if (!enabled) return gb_pwm_enable_operation(pwmc, pwm->hwpwm); return 0; } > > Best regards > Uwe >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists