Received: by 10.223.185.116 with SMTP id b49csp5160807wrg; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 08:42:32 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x225E+voJY/42WcFnAiFw8/7uR1C5hpRQQcI1GZnG/uQYj7Sy0shQ88lIWRyU39Mbg2MAsV+4 X-Received: by 10.101.89.6 with SMTP id f6mr11830621pgu.22.1519749752430; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 08:42:32 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1519749752; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=0sVyqmRxIHLYblQBCW1jwosmqsP8odXoI2dzsGAHWei3kIRthxHBEB4klqKHHZ3wh0 HAsKNUcWU+l9xrV3ia8ZzvPbvp3OP0xsew8x9UATH9ezOcE66EYssm85Ckhk+o3NWTGY f6YxXyLFNOU2wxwB6vWSmggm2KR+I/moqRGCGCbv+fs+kkH9XL/JYGS8DHbtd5fT96TQ i8KGoqQaSDFvXIN3fIs4/fqJ13BSYaklnxNTzmfQSxihwgK6IZ1qYwr8dfiCEw7KLZ/k gAKc2ZLqyUdipo7Yh7z2D5k4wFvy87Hx7G3AWpqyR8EQbVowU+q4jq3COrMxhKRHnwKL LlbA== 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=kfcokxSAzGz2lyE8GIEfqH5qmgiH56zj88IPfBnxzl0=; b=sjPvbmZ0szDMqJk2aWr0OT1VU3mxAl/n4nACLDSYMVumjopT9VY4pb7NxnwWqFm0e5 YuAWMahv7PYaWzrQKwOJi0xP968aCZtbJ5mJAXOaFY2VRcLZGUF5XIxSFmv/EaQwIm60 5HUDGipm6cXwcBSSt0ZuIfhPS7NzAekTILmkwAyWC+qgjwjOLZ9DJ8xV6tPQllhWl5iP mmzah6Z8f82faOr/X6ZmbmP9nZiKyba17IfswYhcgKZgPDE7VEEoJocN/lL93UtwS8fP yEzNthA4+GdpPKTe6tW5cDMoTxh3zjpJg88hIAA4nitCA5Qfz1q4a1G3NmP1pGi1UDpt cw4A== 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 s2-v6si4321859plk.234.2018.02.27.08.42.17; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 08:42:32 -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 S932069AbeB0QQT (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 27 Feb 2018 11:16:19 -0500 Received: from esa2.microchip.iphmx.com ([68.232.149.84]:55858 "EHLO esa2.microchip.iphmx.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752374AbeB0QQD (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Feb 2018 11:16:03 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.47,401,1515481200"; d="scan'208";a="11824784" Received: from exsmtp02.microchip.com (HELO email.microchip.com) ([198.175.253.38]) by esa2.microchip.iphmx.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 27 Feb 2018 09:16:01 -0700 Received: from [10.145.6.76] (10.10.76.4) by chn-sv-exch02.mchp-main.com (10.10.76.38) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.352.0; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 09:16:00 -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> <8e1d3b30-3543-56fd-7be6-7fe6edcb40d9@microchip.com> <20180227153812.txt2vsdygfnobo33@oak.lan> From: Claudiu Beznea Message-ID: <66059303-3a17-d534-3581-9c03cc05a909@microchip.com> Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 18:15:50 +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: <20180227153812.txt2vsdygfnobo33@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 17:38, Daniel Thompson wrote: > On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 01:40:58PM +0200, Claudiu Beznea wrote: >> 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. > > I'm afraid you have confused me here. > > Didn't you just *add* the whole concept of PWM caps with your patches? > How could any existing call site expect anything except normal mode. > Until now there has been no possiblity to request anything else. Agree. And agree I was confusing in previous email, sorry about that. And agree that there was nothing before and everything should work with PWM normal mode. When I choose to have BIT(ffs(caps.modes)) instead of PWM_MODE(NORMAL) I was thinking at having these pwm_config() calls working all the time having in mind that in future the PWM controllers that these drivers use, might change in terms of PWM supported modes. Thank you, Claudiu Beznea > > >>> 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. >>> >