From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tomi.valkeinen@ti.com (Tomi Valkeinen) Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2015 10:17:00 +0300 Subject: [RFC PATCH 00/15] pwm: add support for atomic update In-Reply-To: <20150702070343.GD11824@pengutronix.de> References: <1435738921-25027-1-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> <20150702070343.GD11824@pengutronix.de> Message-ID: <5594E56C.3010908@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 02/07/15 10:03, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote: > Hello Boris, > > On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 10:21:46AM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: >> This series adds support for atomic PWM update, or ITO, the capability >> to update all the parameters of a PWM device (enabled/disabled, period, >> duty and polarity) in one go. > on first reading the subject of your series I thought it was about > asserting that the newly set config is active before the call to > pwm_config (et al) returns. That's a problem I addressed a few times in > the past. I wonder if it's only me or if a different wording should be > used for "update all parameters with a single function call". In my vocabulary "blocking" means that the work is done before the function returns, and "atomic" means the work is done in one step. Tomi -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: