Re: [PATCH -next] pwm: pca9685: Remove set but not used variable 'pwm'

[Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>]

On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 11:08:06AM -0400, Sven Van Asbroeck wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 7:40 AM Mika Westerberg
> <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > I think you are right. pca9685_pwm_request() should take the mutex as
> > long as it is requesting PWM.
> 
> Yes, but things get hairy because pca9685_pwm_request() will have to
> give up the mutex when it returns. I cannot see a way to keep holding
> this mutex while the in-use flag is set by the pwm core ?

Right, I did not notice it's the PWM core that sets the flag.

> Alternatively, we could set (void *)1 pwm_data inside the pwm_request,
> wrapped inside the mutex.
> But then things get 'messy'.
> 
> > A flag would probably be easier to understand than the magic we have
> > now.
> 
> I have the feeling that a flag (plus a mutex) would be the clearest and
> safest way forward. I'll post a patch soon, you guys tell me what you
> think.

Sounds good thanks!