Received: by 10.223.185.116 with SMTP id b49csp4853469wrg; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 03:53:43 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x225s+zjx+rZN4CLplygwVgSjsNcXnDFu8e3OP86j0KTUiRWeYsqTXjc4xCZSCaiZI5UXessJ X-Received: by 10.99.132.74 with SMTP id k71mr10876073pgd.4.1519732423073; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 03:53:43 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1519732423; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=FQ4ag63x0yrTtPBo+ONoGCGs7W1WzNF9TLLfSbDtwFSykMThgF6XvGALTsnNKimS7G oQ4Ok9UVFbSy9VBpcYDjazcOsTT4K+BuSjD6frlEuy1V1TrHrTX5xQ+tqRij4rIi6orJ bGZbhdS2d34MDr+IoTqel4fk+51EsG0yGKxx1zEWAb3895dZYB5lqjcMXfEA1aaS8Nkz SkYEIzBOY+NYkdRrHRzvmtoF6XQ9OF7hXxbZdEbnO3sP092StmOx+dgFcEh8/X2GbRAU qtfdjrAqo7fGjkjii0VEaeLOt7VKvTNkllCX4kLKUEULY3s+jcRcXyjnXdLP02Itb3Ni PYHA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject:arc-authentication-results; bh=jb7UPGU0G1HFkYfkKiyeMVBuJUHB+AsLPPzru+VXMEA=; b=n2FLlROSK2thvnARc6jHEFLJW0nCKLR3Sb4HydQHItn3bo3UcRvuK+HslYVdMpbQxO ItFnpdLJjpawVLXw3DkJjuNqglOzche+p7XJqDUdECCfbK2jky4RU3ihsecFTXUJyt1V UMjl3+Z9gFtynY0IriF+ODBZaydvN3Ldkkve5QjKSwQgo3opvNHex0PpHhIuymlvzJqo w6iV3cDeWwhT6XR844Ql9FRNTSv5G75B9XX38JpZQWQ1s4xn2gQWbUED95GEF0DK/Etb LdNqNhAyzBIqenUZiLv4opwFXbY4bxZraTyXKkpYzMebLQjyTuI8ylefEZGIO6TQVJlu 9UFw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id s13-v6si8048326plp.675.2018.02.27.03.53.28; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 03:53:43 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753117AbeB0LlP (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 27 Feb 2018 06:41:15 -0500 Received: from esa3.microchip.iphmx.com ([68.232.153.233]:10478 "EHLO esa3.microchip.iphmx.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752972AbeB0LlL (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Feb 2018 06:41:11 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.47,400,1515481200"; d="scan'208";a="11899759" Received: from smtpout.microchip.com (HELO email.microchip.com) ([198.175.253.82]) by esa3.microchip.iphmx.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 27 Feb 2018 04:41:09 -0700 Received: from [10.145.6.76] (10.10.76.4) by chn-sv-exch04.mchp-main.com (10.10.76.105) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.352.0; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 04:41:09 -0700 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 05/10] pwm: add PWM mode to pwm_config() To: Daniel Thompson CC: Jani Nikula , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , References: <1519300881-8136-1-git-send-email-claudiu.beznea@microchip.com> <1519300881-8136-6-git-send-email-claudiu.beznea@microchip.com> <20180222123308.mypx2r7n6o63mj5z@oak.lan> <87po4s2hve.fsf@intel.com> <3a70b89c-b470-3723-760c-5294d0a75230@microchip.com> <20180227105444.lo4pee7vh4we3foq@oak.lan> From: Claudiu Beznea Message-ID: <8e1d3b30-3543-56fd-7be6-7fe6edcb40d9@microchip.com> Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 13:40:58 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180227105444.lo4pee7vh4we3foq@oak.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 27.02.2018 12:54, Daniel Thompson wrote: > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 04:24:15PM +0200, Claudiu Beznea wrote: >> On 26.02.2018 11:57, Jani Nikula wrote: >>> On Thu, 22 Feb 2018, Daniel Thompson wrote: >>>> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 02:01:16PM +0200, Claudiu Beznea wrote: >>>>> Add PWM mode to pwm_config() function. The drivers which uses pwm_config() >>>>> were adapted to this change. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Claudiu Beznea >>>>> --- >>>>> arch/arm/mach-s3c24xx/mach-rx1950.c | 11 +++++++++-- >>>>> drivers/bus/ts-nbus.c | 2 +- >>>>> drivers/clk/clk-pwm.c | 3 ++- >>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_panel.c | 17 ++++++++++++++--- >>>>> drivers/hwmon/pwm-fan.c | 2 +- >>>>> drivers/input/misc/max77693-haptic.c | 2 +- >>>>> drivers/input/misc/max8997_haptic.c | 6 +++++- >>>>> drivers/leds/leds-pwm.c | 5 ++++- >>>>> drivers/media/rc/ir-rx51.c | 5 ++++- >>>>> drivers/media/rc/pwm-ir-tx.c | 5 ++++- >>>>> drivers/video/backlight/lm3630a_bl.c | 4 +++- >>>>> drivers/video/backlight/lp855x_bl.c | 4 +++- >>>>> drivers/video/backlight/lp8788_bl.c | 5 ++++- >>>>> drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c | 11 +++++++++-- >>>>> drivers/video/fbdev/ssd1307fb.c | 3 ++- >>>>> include/linux/pwm.h | 6 ++++-- >>>>> 16 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/lm3630a_bl.c b/drivers/video/backlight/lm3630a_bl.c >>>>> index 2030a6b77a09..696fa25dafd2 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/video/backlight/lm3630a_bl.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/video/backlight/lm3630a_bl.c >>>>> @@ -165,8 +165,10 @@ static void lm3630a_pwm_ctrl(struct lm3630a_chip *pchip, int br, int br_max) >>>>> { >>>>> unsigned int period = pchip->pdata->pwm_period; >>>>> unsigned int duty = br * period / br_max; >>>>> + struct pwm_caps caps = { }; >>>>> >>>>> - pwm_config(pchip->pwmd, duty, period); >>>>> + pwm_get_caps(pchip->pwmd->chip, pchip->pwmd, &caps); >>>>> + pwm_config(pchip->pwmd, duty, period, BIT(ffs(caps.modes) - 1)); >>>> >>>> Well... I admit I've only really looked at the patches that impact >>>> backlight but dispersing this really odd looking bit twiddling >>>> throughout the kernel doesn't strike me a great API design. >>>> >>>> IMHO callers should not be required to find the first set bit in >>>> some specially crafted set of capability bits simply to get sane >>>> default behaviour. >>> >>> Agreed. IMHO the regular use case becomes rather tedious, ugly, and >>> error prone. >> >> Using simply PWM_MODE(NORMAL) instead of BIT(ffs(caps.modes) - 1) would be OK >> from your side? >> >> Or, what about using a function like pwm_mode_first() to get the first supported >> mode by PWM channel? >> >> Or, would you prefer to solve this inside pwm_config() function, let's say, in >> case an invalid mode is passed as argument, to let pwm_config() to choose the >> first available PWM mode for PWM channel passed as argument? > > What is it that actually needs solving? > > If a driver requests normal mode and the PWM driver cannot support it > why not just return an error an move on. Because, simply, I wasn't aware of what these PWM client drivers needs for. > > Put another way, what is the use case for secretly adopting a mode the > caller didn't want? Under what circumstances is this a good thing? No one... But I wasn't aware of what the PWM clients needs for from their PWM controllers. At this moment having BIT(ffs(caps.modes)) instead of PWM_MODE(NORMAL) is mostly the same since all the driver that has not explicitly registered PWM caps will use PWM normal mode. I will use PWM_MODE(NORMAL) instead of this in all the cases if this is OK from your side. Thank you, Claudiu Beznea > > > Daniel. >