From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2015 06:44:45 +0000 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 05/15] pwm: introduce default period and polarity concepts Message-Id: <20150702064445.GC11824@pengutronix.de> List-Id: References: <1435738921-25027-1-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> <1435738921-25027-6-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> In-Reply-To: <1435738921-25027-6-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 10:21:51AM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > When requested by a user, the PWM is assigned a default period and polari= ty > extracted from the DT, the platform data or statically set by the driver. > Those default values are currently stored in the period and polarity > fields of the pwm_device struct, but they will be stored somewhere else > once we have introduced the architecture allowing for hardware state > retrieval. >=20 > The pwm_set_default_polarity and pwm_set_default_period should only be > used by PWM drivers or the PWM core infrastructure to specify the > default period and polarity values. Would it make sense to put the prototypes of pwm_set_default_p{olarity,eriod} into (say) drivers/pwm/pwm-private.h then? Best regards Uwe --=20 Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K=F6nig | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |