On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 04:49:52PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> Now, I do agree that the terminology is a little confusing here. If you
> look at the GPIO API there are gpio_*_cansleep() accessors, which in
> their case, convey the correct meaning: the operation can/might sleep.

Perhaps I'm misreading, but that actually sounds exactly the same as the
pwm_can_sleep() API. It sounds OK from a consumer/API perspective, but I
was just commenting on the perspective of the driver writer.

Maybe it's not worth much change, then, if several subsystems have
similar naming.

Brian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pwm" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to