Re: [PATCH v3 06/10] pwm: Add NVIDIA Tegra SoC support

[Thierry Reding <thierry.reding-RM9K5IK7kjKj5M59NBduVrNAH6kLmebB@public.gmane.org>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1196 bytes --]

* Ryan Mallon wrote:
> On 23/02/12 02:17, Thierry Reding wrote:
> 
> > This commit adds a generic PWM framework driver for the PWFM controller
> > found on NVIDIA Tegra SoCs. The driver is based on code from the
> > Chromium kernel tree and was originally written by Gary King (NVIDIA)
> > and later modified by Simon Que (Chromium).
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding-RM9K5IK7kjKj5M59NBduVrNAH6kLmebB@public.gmane.org>
> > ---
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > +
> > +	pwm->chip.dev = &pdev->dev;
> > +	pwm->chip.ops = &tegra_pwm_ops;
> > +	pwm->chip.base = -1;
> > +	pwm->chip.npwm = NUM_PWM;
> 
> > +
> > +	ret = pwmchip_add(&pwm->chip);
> 
> 
> If a driver fails to initialise the pwm_chip structure correctly it can
> cause problems in the pwm core. For example, if the dev field doesn't
> get set, then you will get an oops if you try to cat the pwm debugfs file.
> 
> pwmchip_add should probably verify that the initialisation of the
> pwm_chip structure is sane to avoid problems like this.

Absolutely. What would be the best response to an invalid struct pwm_chip? I
suppose at least returning -EINVAL, perhaps complemented with WARN_ON?

Thierry

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 192 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
devicetree-discuss mailing list
devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss