Use if and else instead of if(A) and if (!A).
Signed-off-by: Wan Jiabing <wanjiabing@vivo.com>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
pwmchip_remove() returns always 0. Don't use the value to make it
possible to eventually change the function to return void. Also the
driver core ignores the return value of pwm_sifive_remove().
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
With the previous commit there is no need for the lowlevel driver any
more to specify it it uses two or three cells. So simplify accordingly.
The only non-trival change affects the pwm-rockchip driver: It used to only
support three cells if the hardware supports polarity. Now the default
number depends on the device tree which has to match hardware anyhow
(and if it doesn't the error is just a bit delayed as a PWM handle with
an inverted setting is catched when pwm_apply_state() is called).
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Since commit 5e5da1e9fb ("pwm: ab8500: Explicitly allocate pwm chip
base dynamically") all drivers use dynamic ID allocation explicitly. New
drivers are supposed to do the same, so remove support for driver
specified base IDs and drop all assignments in the low-level drivers.
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Common pattern of handling deferred probe can be simplified with
dev_err_probe(). Less code and also it prints the error value.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@google.com>
Acked-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Since the PWM framework is switching struct pwm_args.period's datatype
to u64, prepare for this transition by using DIV64_U64_ROUND_CLOSEST to
handle a 64-bit divisor.
Signed-off-by: Guru Das Srinagesh <gurus@codeaurora.org>
Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
It is surprising for a PWM consumer when the variable holding the
requested state is modified by pwm_apply_state(). Consider for example a
driver doing:
#define PERIOD 5000000
#define DUTY_LITTLE 10
...
struct pwm_state state = {
.period = PERIOD,
.duty_cycle = DUTY_LITTLE,
.polarity = PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL,
.enabled = true,
};
pwm_apply_state(mypwm, &state);
...
state.duty_cycle = PERIOD / 2;
pwm_apply_state(mypwm, &state);
For sure the second call to pwm_apply_state() should still have
state.period = PERIOD and not something the hardware driver chose for a
reason that doesn't necessarily apply to the second call.
So declare the state argument as a pointer to a const type and adapt all
drivers' .apply callbacks.
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Wan Jiabing