Re: [PATCH v5 36/46] input: misc: max77693: switch to the atomic API

Dmitry Torokhov
2016-03-31T17:48:12Z

Hi Boris,

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:03:59PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> pwm_config/enable/disable() have been deprecated and should be replaced
> by pwm_apply_state().
>
> Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
> ---
> drivers/input/misc/max77693-haptic.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/max77693-haptic.c b/drivers/input/misc/max77693-haptic.c
> index cf6aac0..aef7dc4 100644
> --- a/drivers/input/misc/max77693-haptic.c
> +++ b/drivers/input/misc/max77693-haptic.c
> @@ -70,13 +70,16 @@ struct max77693_haptic {
>
> static int max77693_haptic_set_duty_cycle(struct max77693_haptic *haptic)
> {
> + struct pwm_state pstate;
> struct pwm_args pargs = { };
> - int delta;
> int error;
>
> pwm_get_args(haptic->pwm_dev, &pargs);
> - delta = (pargs.period + haptic->pwm_duty) / 2;
> - error = pwm_config(haptic->pwm_dev, delta, pargs.period);
> + pwm_get_state(haptic->pwm_dev, &pstate);
> +
> + pstate.period = pargs.period;
> + pstate.duty_cycle = (pargs.period + haptic->pwm_duty) / 2;
> + error = pwm_apply_state(haptic->pwm_dev, &pstate);

This does not make sense with regard to the atomic API. If you look in
max77693_haptic_play_work(), right after calling
max77693_haptic_set_duty_cycle() we either try to enable or disable the
pwm. When switching to this new API we should combine both actions.

> if (error) {
> dev_err(haptic->dev, "failed to configure pwm: %d\n", error);
> return error;
> @@ -161,12 +164,16 @@ static int max77693_haptic_lowsys(struct max77693_haptic *haptic, bool enable)
>
> static void max77693_haptic_enable(struct max77693_haptic *haptic)
> {
> + struct pwm_state pstate;
> int error;
>
> if (haptic->enabled)
> return;
>
> - error = pwm_enable(haptic->pwm_dev);
> + pwm_get_state(haptic->pwm_dev, &pstate);
> + pstate.enabled = true;
> +
> + error = pwm_apply_state(haptic->pwm_dev, &pstate);

As I mentioned I'd rather we did not deprecate pwm_enable() and
pwm_disable() (and maybe others), as it forces us to add unnecessary
boilerplate code to the drivers.

> if (error) {
> dev_err(haptic->dev,
> "failed to enable haptic pwm device: %d\n", error);
> @@ -188,11 +195,13 @@ static void max77693_haptic_enable(struct max77693_haptic *haptic)
> err_enable_config:
> max77693_haptic_lowsys(haptic, false);
> err_enable_lowsys:
> - pwm_disable(haptic->pwm_dev);
> + pstate.enabled = false;
> + pwm_apply_state(haptic->pwm_dev, &pstate);
> }
>
> static void max77693_haptic_disable(struct max77693_haptic *haptic)
> {
> + struct pwm_state pstate;
> int error;
>
> if (!haptic->enabled)
> @@ -206,7 +215,9 @@ static void max77693_haptic_disable(struct max77693_haptic *haptic)
> if (error)
> goto err_disable_lowsys;
>
> - pwm_disable(haptic->pwm_dev);
> + pwm_get_state(haptic->pwm_dev, &pstate);
> + pstate.enabled = false;
> + pwm_apply_state(haptic->pwm_dev, &pstate);

Same here.

> haptic->enabled = false;
>
> return;
> --
> 2.5.0
>

Thanks.

--
Dmitry