From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paulo Costa Subject: Re: [RFC] ledtrig-dither: A Poor man's adjustable LED brightness. Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 01:21:37 -0300 Message-ID: References: <20170815213541.26985-1-me@paulo.costa.nom.br> <20170815223413.GA8886@amd> <20170816223022.GA13540@amd> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Return-path: Received: from mail-qt0-f170.google.com ([209.85.216.170]:36896 "EHLO mail-qt0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750957AbdHQEVj (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Aug 2017 00:21:39 -0400 Received: by mail-qt0-f170.google.com with SMTP id 16so31743286qtz.4 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2017 21:21:38 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20170816223022.GA13540@amd> Sender: linux-leds-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-leds@vger.kernel.org To: Pavel Machek Cc: linux-leds@vger.kernel.org > Hmm. You could do led=on, udelay(100), led=off. Do that 100 times a > second, and I believe you'll get quite nice low levels. I don't want to keep the CPU busy on a delay() just for blinking led, even if only for a few micros. > Now... nice hack. Probably can be improved. But is it suitable for > mainline? Thank you =) It's a proof of concept for now, definitely not ready for mainline. Instead of a LED trigger + wrapper LED entry, I think this should kick in if we set 'myled/dither=1' or something like that. Now, do you think it would be a nice addition / Should I put more work on it? Thanks for looking into it