linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] spi: spi-offload-trigger-pwm: Use duty offset

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <813ddecb-efde-4c11-be45-e894fc52f752@baylibre.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2025 14:19:37 -0500
From: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>
To: Marcelo Schmitt <marcelo.schmitt@...log.com>, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Axel Haslam <ahaslam@...libre.com>, broonie@...nel.org, jic23@...nel.org,
 nuno.sa@...log.com, andy@...nel.org, marcelo.schmitt1@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] spi: spi-offload-trigger-pwm: Use duty offset

On 9/18/25 12:34 PM, Marcelo Schmitt wrote:
> From: Axel Haslam <ahaslam@...libre.com>
> 
> Pass the duty offset to the waveform pwm.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Axel Haslam <ahaslam@...libre.com>
> Signed-off-by: Marcelo Schmitt <marcelo.schmitt@...log.com>
> ---
>  drivers/spi/spi-offload-trigger-pwm.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-offload-trigger-pwm.c b/drivers/spi/spi-offload-trigger-pwm.c
> index 805ed41560df..3e8c19227edb 100644
> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-offload-trigger-pwm.c
> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-offload-trigger-pwm.c
> @@ -51,12 +51,14 @@ static int spi_offload_trigger_pwm_validate(struct spi_offload_trigger *trigger,
>  	wf.period_length_ns = DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(NSEC_PER_SEC, periodic->frequency_hz);
>  	/* REVISIT: 50% duty-cycle for now - may add config parameter later */
>  	wf.duty_length_ns = wf.period_length_ns / 2;
> +	wf.duty_offset_ns = periodic->offset_ns;
>  
>  	ret = pwm_round_waveform_might_sleep(st->pwm, &wf);
>  	if (ret < 0)
>  		return ret;
>  
>  	periodic->frequency_hz = DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(NSEC_PER_SEC, wf.period_length_ns);
> +	periodic->offset_ns = wf.duty_offset_ns;
>  
>  	return 0;
>  }
> @@ -77,6 +79,7 @@ static int spi_offload_trigger_pwm_enable(struct spi_offload_trigger *trigger,
>  	wf.period_length_ns = DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(NSEC_PER_SEC, periodic->frequency_hz);
>  	/* REVISIT: 50% duty-cycle for now - may add config parameter later */
>  	wf.duty_length_ns = wf.period_length_ns / 2;
> +	wf.duty_offset_ns = periodic->offset_ns;
>  
>  	return pwm_set_waveform_might_sleep(st->pwm, &wf, false);
>  }

Does this really need to be a separate patch from the one
that adds the field?