On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 02:30:26PM +0200, Paul Cercueil wrote: > The ingenic-timer "TCU" driver provides us with clocks, that can be > (un)gated, reparented or reclocked from devicetree, instead of having > these settings hardcoded in this driver. > > While this driver is devicetree-compatible, it is never (as of now) > probed from devicetree, so this change does not introduce a ABI problem > with current devicetree files. > > Signed-off-by: Paul Cercueil <[email protected]> > Tested-by: Mathieu Malaterre <[email protected]> > Tested-by: Artur Rojek <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/pwm/Kconfig | 1 + > drivers/pwm/pwm-jz4740.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- > 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig > index cc4df0ec978a..d2557c6fcf65 100644 > --- a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig > +++ b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig > @@ -225,6 +225,7 @@ config PWM_IMX_TPM > config PWM_JZ4740 > tristate "Ingenic JZ47xx PWM support" > depends on MACH_INGENIC > + depends on COMMON_CLK > select MFD_SYSCON > help > Generic PWM framework driver for Ingenic JZ47xx based > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-jz4740.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-jz4740.c > index 7aea5e0c6e18..6ec8794d3b99 100644 > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-jz4740.c > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-jz4740.c > @@ -20,7 +20,6 @@ > > struct jz4740_pwm_chip { > struct pwm_chip chip; > - struct clk *clk; > struct regmap *map; > }; > > @@ -32,6 +31,9 @@ static inline struct jz4740_pwm_chip *to_jz4740(struct > pwm_chip *chip) > static int jz4740_pwm_request(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm) > { > struct jz4740_pwm_chip *jz = to_jz4740(chip); > + struct clk *clk; > + char clk_name[16]; > + int ret; > > /* > * Timers 0 and 1 are used for system tasks, so they are unavailable > @@ -40,16 +42,29 @@ static int jz4740_pwm_request(struct pwm_chip *chip, > struct pwm_device *pwm) > if (pwm->hwpwm < 2) > return -EBUSY; > > - regmap_write(jz->map, TCU_REG_TSCR, BIT(pwm->hwpwm)); > + snprintf(clk_name, sizeof(clk_name), "timer%u", pwm->hwpwm);
This undoes stuff from the previous patch. Maybe swap the order of the two patches? Other than that the patch looks fine on a quick glance. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
