[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZWCm8_S7epYQwZiG@orome.fritz.box>
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:36:51 +0100
From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
To: Sean Young <sean@...s.org>
Cc: linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org,
Ivaylo Dimitrov <ivo.g.dimitrov.75@...il.com>,
Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/4] pwm: make it possible to apply pwm changes in
atomic context
On Sat, Nov 18, 2023 at 04:16:18PM +0000, Sean Young wrote:
[...]
> diff --git a/include/linux/pwm.h b/include/linux/pwm.h
> index c4b066f7c5097..495aba06c64c3 100644
> --- a/include/linux/pwm.h
> +++ b/include/linux/pwm.h
> @@ -286,6 +286,7 @@ struct pwm_ops {
> * @npwm: number of PWMs controlled by this chip
> * @of_xlate: request a PWM device given a device tree PWM specifier
> * @of_pwm_n_cells: number of cells expected in the device tree PWM specifier
> + * @atomic: can the driver execute pwm_apply_cansleep in atomic context
I'm a little reluctant to suggest that we rename this to might_sleep as
well because it would require that we audit each and every driver to set
this properly, since by default all devices have so far been defaulting
to "might_sleep". But then again, I think that's something that we're
going to need to do at some point anyway.
In the interim, I think we could keep it like this and address this as a
follow-up.
Thierry
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists