| Message ID | 1459368249-13241-2-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:03:24PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > Commit 5c31252c4a86 ("pwm: Add the pwm_is_enabled() helper") introduced a > new function to test whether a PWM device is enabled or not without > manipulating PWM internal fields. > Hiding this is necessary if we want to smoothly move to the atomic PWM > config approach without impacting PWM drivers. > Fix this driver to use pwm_is_enabled() instead of directly accessing the > ->flags field. > > Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> > --- > drivers/pwm/pwm-rcar.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Applied, thanks. Thierry
Hi Thierry On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:01:52 +0200 Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:03:24PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > Commit 5c31252c4a86 ("pwm: Add the pwm_is_enabled() helper") introduced a > > new function to test whether a PWM device is enabled or not without > > manipulating PWM internal fields. > > Hiding this is necessary if we want to smoothly move to the atomic PWM > > config approach without impacting PWM drivers. > > Fix this driver to use pwm_is_enabled() instead of directly accessing the > > ->flags field. > > > > Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> > > --- > > drivers/pwm/pwm-rcar.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > Applied, thanks. I'd like to rebase my atomic series on top of pwm/for-next but I don't see the 4 patches you said you applied. Did you forget to push your local branch, or did you decide to revert them based on Lee's comments? Regards, Boris
diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-rcar.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-rcar.c index 7b8ac06..1c85ecc 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-rcar.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-rcar.c @@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ static int rcar_pwm_config(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, return div; /* Let the core driver set pwm->period if disabled and duty_ns == 0 */ - if (!test_bit(PWMF_ENABLED, &pwm->flags) && !duty_ns) + if (!pwm_is_enabled(pwm) && !duty_ns) return 0; rcar_pwm_update(rp, RCAR_PWMCR_SYNC, RCAR_PWMCR_SYNC, RCAR_PWMCR);
Commit 5c31252c4a86 ("pwm: Add the pwm_is_enabled() helper") introduced a new function to test whether a PWM device is enabled or not without manipulating PWM internal fields. Hiding this is necessary if we want to smoothly move to the atomic PWM config approach without impacting PWM drivers. Fix this driver to use pwm_is_enabled() instead of directly accessing the ->flags field. Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> --- drivers/pwm/pwm-rcar.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)