From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "David Rivshin (Allworx)" Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] pwm: omap-dmtimer: add dev_dbg() message for effective period and duty cycle Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 13:22:28 -0500 Message-ID: <20160201132228.2634b72e.drivshin.allworx@gmail.com> References: <1454128014-22866-1-git-send-email-drivshin.allworx@gmail.com> <1454128014-22866-5-git-send-email-drivshin.allworx@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-pwm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Neil Armstrong , Thierry Reding Cc: linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Tony Lindgren , Grant Erickson , NeilBrown , Joachim Eastwood List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 30 Jan 2016 15:51:06 +0100 Neil Armstrong wrote: > 2016-01-30 5:26 GMT+01:00 David Rivshin (Allworx) > : > > From: David Rivshin > > > > After going through the math and constraints checking to compute > > load and match values, it is helpful to know what the resultant > > period and duty cycle are. > > > > Signed-off-by: David Rivshin > > --- > > > > I found this helpful while testing the other changes, so I included > > it in case it may be of use to someone in the future. I would have > > no issues with dropping this if it's not considered worthwhile. > > It's useful, but converting it as a sysfs attribute would be great ! Hrm, yes that is an interesting thought. I imagine that many PWM devices have similar constraints, so perhaps that would be best handled generically in the pwm core? Maybe as new optional get_*() ops, a modification to the config() op to add output params, or just updating new fields in the struct pwm directly?