All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
diff for duplicates of <20160617141719.GH21702@dell>

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt
index 9e2826d..2cbea95 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N1/1.txt
@@ -13,9 +13,9 @@ On Sat, 11 Jun 2016, Lothar Waßmann wrote:
 > > > > > > > where the value at index 0 may well be non-zero
 > > > > > > > (tegra30-apalis-eval.dts and tegra30-colibri-eval-v3.dts are real-life
 > > > > > > > examples).
-> > > > > > > Thus brightness = 0 does not necessarily mean that the PWM output
+> > > > > > > Thus brightness == 0 does not necessarily mean that the PWM output
 > > > > > > > will be inactive.
-> > > > > > > Check for 'duty_cycle = 0' rather than 'brightness = 0' to decide
+> > > > > > > Check for 'duty_cycle == 0' rather than 'brightness == 0' to decide
 > > > > > > > whether to disable the PWM.
 > > > > > > > 
 > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Lothar Waßmann <LW@KARO-electronics.de>
@@ -81,8 +81,8 @@ On Sat, 11 Jun 2016, Lothar Waßmann wrote:
 > > > > someone is going to get screwed by this logic.
 > > > > 
 > > > The backlight framework does not (and does not need to) know anything
-> > > about PWM duty cycles. Its 'brightness' values are consistently 0 =
-> > > dark, max = brightest in either case.
+> > > about PWM duty cycles. Its 'brightness' values are consistently 0 ==
+> > > dark, max == brightest in either case.
 > > 
 > > What I'm getting at is; by the look of the documentation, the
 > > brightest setting can either be a duty cycle of 0 or 255.  So what
@@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ On Sat, 11 Jun 2016, Lothar Waßmann wrote:
 > first element of brightness-levels, the PWM will be disabled rather than
 > switched to the given duty cycle.
 > Disabling the PWM should have the same effect as setting the duty cycle
-> to 0, so it is safe to check for duty_cycle = 0 to decide whether to
+> to 0, so it is safe to check for duty_cycle == 0 to decide whether to
 > disable the PWM.
 
 I agree with this. BUT, that's not what you're doing is it?
@@ -110,11 +110,11 @@ if (duty_cycle > 0) {
 } else
         pwm_backlight_power_off(pb);
 
-Let's say duty_cycle = 0.  In some cases this can mean "turn
+Let's say duty_cycle == 0.  In some cases this can mean "turn
 brightness up to the *maximum*", but with your new logic you just
 turned the backlight *off*.
 
-Conversely, let's say duty_cycle = 255.  In some cases this can mean
+Conversely, let's say duty_cycle == 255.  In some cases this can mean
 "turn the brightness to the *lowest* setting" i.e. *off*. Well your
 logic just turned the backlight *on*.
 
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest
index 094ff6d..2023401 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N1/content_digest
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
  "ref\020160611090803.42aeaf5f@ipc1.ka-ro\0"
  "From\0Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>\0"
  "Subject\0Re: [PATCHv2] backlight: pwm_bl: disable PWM when 'duty_cycle' is zero\0"
- "Date\0Fri, 17 Jun 2016 14:17:19 +0000\0"
+ "Date\0Fri, 17 Jun 2016 15:17:19 +0100\0"
  "To\0Lothar Wa\303\237mann <LW@karo-electronics.de>\0"
  "Cc\0Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>"
   Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@gmail.com>
@@ -40,9 +40,9 @@
  "> > > > > > > where the value at index 0 may well be non-zero\n"
  "> > > > > > > (tegra30-apalis-eval.dts and tegra30-colibri-eval-v3.dts are real-life\n"
  "> > > > > > > examples).\n"
- "> > > > > > > Thus brightness = 0 does not necessarily mean that the PWM output\n"
+ "> > > > > > > Thus brightness == 0 does not necessarily mean that the PWM output\n"
  "> > > > > > > will be inactive.\n"
- "> > > > > > > Check for 'duty_cycle = 0' rather than 'brightness = 0' to decide\n"
+ "> > > > > > > Check for 'duty_cycle == 0' rather than 'brightness == 0' to decide\n"
  "> > > > > > > whether to disable the PWM.\n"
  "> > > > > > > \n"
  "> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Lothar Wa\303\237mann <LW@KARO-electronics.de>\n"
@@ -108,8 +108,8 @@
  "> > > > someone is going to get screwed by this logic.\n"
  "> > > > \n"
  "> > > The backlight framework does not (and does not need to) know anything\n"
- "> > > about PWM duty cycles. Its 'brightness' values are consistently 0 =\n"
- "> > > dark, max = brightest in either case.\n"
+ "> > > about PWM duty cycles. Its 'brightness' values are consistently 0 ==\n"
+ "> > > dark, max == brightest in either case.\n"
  "> > \n"
  "> > What I'm getting at is; by the look of the documentation, the\n"
  "> > brightest setting can either be a duty cycle of 0 or 255.  So what\n"
@@ -123,7 +123,7 @@
  "> first element of brightness-levels, the PWM will be disabled rather than\n"
  "> switched to the given duty cycle.\n"
  "> Disabling the PWM should have the same effect as setting the duty cycle\n"
- "> to 0, so it is safe to check for duty_cycle = 0 to decide whether to\n"
+ "> to 0, so it is safe to check for duty_cycle == 0 to decide whether to\n"
  "> disable the PWM.\n"
  "\n"
  "I agree with this. BUT, that's not what you're doing is it?\n"
@@ -137,11 +137,11 @@
  "} else\n"
  "        pwm_backlight_power_off(pb);\n"
  "\n"
- "Let's say duty_cycle = 0.  In some cases this can mean \"turn\n"
+ "Let's say duty_cycle == 0.  In some cases this can mean \"turn\n"
  "brightness up to the *maximum*\", but with your new logic you just\n"
  "turned the backlight *off*.\n"
  "\n"
- "Conversely, let's say duty_cycle = 255.  In some cases this can mean\n"
+ "Conversely, let's say duty_cycle == 255.  In some cases this can mean\n"
  "\"turn the brightness to the *lowest* setting\" i.e. *off*. Well your\n"
  "logic just turned the backlight *on*.\n"
  "\n"
@@ -154,4 +154,4 @@
  "Linaro.org \342\224\202 Open source software for ARM SoCs\n"
  Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
 
-12ba95965e199c8e2f97865aaff6cdabe7d4fb54a82e5726544aa46abdd28ed8
+a1d0630dad75b46a2db9bd1e4ade981dfca29b3665f3b3763c3b8b1da36de92c

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.