`last_repeat` holds the actual value requested by the user whereas
`repeat` is a software iteration variable that is unused in hardware
patterns.
Furthermore `last_repeat` is the field returned to the user when reading
the `repeat` sysfs property. This field is initialized to `-1` which is
- together with `1` - the only valid value in the upcoming Qualcomm LPG
driver. It is thus unexpected when `repeat` with an initialization
value of `0` is passed into the the driver, when the sysfs property
clearly presents a value of `-1`.
Signed-off-by: Marijn Suijten <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Bjorn Andersson <[email protected]>
Tested-by: Bjorn Andersson <[email protected]>
---
drivers/leds/trigger/ledtrig-pattern.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/leds/trigger/ledtrig-pattern.c b/drivers/leds/trigger/ledtrig-pattern.c
index 43a265dc4696..a11d68143757 100644
--- a/drivers/leds/trigger/ledtrig-pattern.c
+++ b/drivers/leds/trigger/ledtrig-pattern.c
@@ -126,7 +126,8 @@ static int pattern_trig_start_pattern(struct led_classdev *led_cdev)
if (data->is_hw_pattern) {
return led_cdev->pattern_set(led_cdev, data->patterns,
- data->npatterns, data->repeat);
+ data->npatterns,
+ data->last_repeat);
}
/* At least 2 tuples for software pattern. */
base-commit: 3b87ed7ea4d598c81a03317a92dfbd59102224fd
--
2.37.1
On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 11:30:33PM +0200, Marijn Suijten wrote:
> `last_repeat` holds the actual value requested by the user whereas
> `repeat` is a software iteration variable that is unused in hardware
> patterns.
>
> Furthermore `last_repeat` is the field returned to the user when reading
> the `repeat` sysfs property. This field is initialized to `-1` which is
> - together with `1` - the only valid value in the upcoming Qualcomm LPG
> driver. It is thus unexpected when `repeat` with an initialization
> value of `0` is passed into the the driver, when the sysfs property
> clearly presents a value of `-1`.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marijn Suijten <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Bjorn Andersson <[email protected]>
> Tested-by: Bjorn Andersson <[email protected]>
Looks correct to me:
Reviewed-by: Johan Hovold <[email protected]>