Re: [PATCH] pwm-backlight: allow for non-increasing brightness levels

[Thierry Reding <thierry.reding-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2176 bytes --]

On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 11:35:52AM -0700, Mike Dunn wrote:
> Currently the driver assumes that the values specified in the brightness-levels
> device tree property increase as they are parsed from left to right.  But boards
> that invert the signal between the PWM output and the backlight will need to
> specify decreasing brightness-levels.  This patch removes the assumption that
> the last element of the array is the max value, and instead searches the array
> for the max value and uses that as the normalizing value when determining the
> duty cycle.

"maximum value", "... and uses that as the scale to normalize the duty
cycle"?

Also please wrap commit messages at 72 characters.

> diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c b/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c
> index 1fea627..d66aaa0 100644
> --- a/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c
> +++ b/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c
> @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ struct pwm_bl_data {
>  	unsigned int		period;
>  	unsigned int		lth_brightness;
>  	unsigned int		*levels;
> +	unsigned int		max_level;

Perhaps call this "scale"? Otherwise there some potential to mix it up
with max_brightness.

> @@ -195,7 +196,15 @@ static int pwm_backlight_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	}
>  
>  	if (data->levels) {
> -		max = data->levels[data->max_brightness];
> +		int i, max_value = 0, max_idx = 0;

i should be unsigned int to match the type of data->max_brightness.

> +		for (i = 0; i <= data->max_brightness; i++) {

There should be a blank line above this one to increase readability.

> +			if (data->levels[i] > max_value) {
> +				max_value = data->levels[i];
> +				max_idx = i;
> +			}
> +		}
> +		pb->max_level = max_idx;

Some here.

Also I suggest to just drop the max_ prefix from the local variables.
Perhaps also simplify all of it to something like:

	for (i = 0; i <= data->max_brightness; i++)
		if (data->levels[i] > pb->scale)
			pb->scale = data->levels[i];

And get rid of the index altogether. That way you can use pb->scale
directly during the computation of the duty cycle and don't have to
index the levels array over and over again.

Thierry

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]