All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
To: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Fabrice Gasnier <fabrice.gasnier@st.com>, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] pwm: stm32: Remove confusing bitmask
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 11:50:42 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191016095042.GB1303817@ulmo> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191016083107.fetprdj7k52hkdvy@pengutronix.de>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2455 bytes --]

On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 10:31:07AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 09:38:41AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > Both BKP bits are set in the BDTR register and the code relies on the
> > mask used during write to make sure only one of them is written. Since
> > this isn't immediately obvious, a comment is needed to explain it. The
> > same can be achieved by making explicit what happens, so add another
> > temporary variable that contains only the one bit that is actually ORed
> > into the register and get rid of the comment.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/pwm/pwm-stm32.c | 10 ++++------
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-stm32.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-stm32.c
> > index b12fb11b7a55..8f1f3371e1dd 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-stm32.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-stm32.c
> > @@ -493,26 +493,24 @@ static const struct pwm_ops stm32pwm_ops = {
> >  static int stm32_pwm_set_breakinput(struct stm32_pwm *priv,
> >  				    int index, int level, int filter)
> >  {
> > -	u32 bke, shift, mask, bdtr;
> > +	u32 bke, bkp, shift, mask, bdtr;
> >  
> >  	if (index == 0) {
> >  		bke = TIM_BDTR_BKE;
> > +		bkp = TIM_BDTR_BKP;
> >  		shift = TIM_BDTR_BKF_SHIFT;
> >  		mask = TIM_BDTR_BKE | TIM_BDTR_BKP | TIM_BDTR_BKF;
> >  	} else {
> >  		bke = TIM_BDTR_BK2E;
> > +		bkp = TIM_BDTR_BK2P;
> >  		shift = TIM_BDTR_BK2F_SHIFT;
> >  		mask = TIM_BDTR_BK2E | TIM_BDTR_BK2P | TIM_BDTR_BK2F;
> 
> Assuming in the else branch index is always 1, the following would be
> IMHO nicer:
> 
> #define TIM_BDTR_BKE(i) BIT(12 + 12 * (i))
> #define TIM_BDTR_BKP(i) BIT(13 + 12 * (i))
> #define TIM_BDTR_BKF_SHIFT(i) (16 + 4 * (i))
> 
> ..
> 
> 	bke = TIM_BDTR_BKE(index);
> 	bkp = TIM_BDTR_BKP(index);

I had thought about that, but ultimately decided against it because
the original defines might match exactly what's in the datasheet, so
there's some value to keep the originals.

I suppose one other alternative would be to let the macros be and do the
computations in the driver instead, something like:

	bke = TIM_BDTR_BKE << (index * 12);
	bkp = TIM_BDTR_BKP << (index * 12);
	bkf = TIM_BDTR_BKF << (index *  4);

But yeah, I agree that having the parameters be part of the macros is
even better.

Fabrice, any objection to redefining the macros as above?

Thierry

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2019-10-16  9:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-16  7:38 [PATCH 0/3] pwm: stm32: Minor cleanups Thierry Reding
2019-10-16  7:38 ` [PATCH 1/3] pwm: stm32: Remove clutter from ternary operator Thierry Reding
2019-10-16  8:26   ` Uwe Kleine-König
2019-10-16  9:30     ` Thierry Reding
2019-10-16  7:38 ` [PATCH 2/3] pwm: stm32: Remove confusing bitmask Thierry Reding
2019-10-16  8:31   ` Uwe Kleine-König
2019-10-16  9:50     ` Thierry Reding [this message]
2019-10-16 10:20       ` Fabrice Gasnier
2019-10-16 10:52         ` Uwe Kleine-König
2019-10-16  7:38 ` [PATCH 3/3] pwm: stm32: Pass breakinput instead of its values Thierry Reding
2019-10-16  8:33 ` [PATCH 0/3] pwm: stm32: Minor cleanups Uwe Kleine-König

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20191016095042.GB1303817@ulmo \
    --to=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
    --cc=fabrice.gasnier@st.com \
    --cc=linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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.