Re: [PATCH V2 1/9] pwm: core: Add support for PWM HW driver with pwm capture only

On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 10:10:36AM +0530, Rajkumar Rampelli wrote: > Add support for pwm HW driver which has only capture functionality. > This helps to implement the PWM based Tachometer driver which reads > the PWM output signals from electronic fans. > > PWM Tachometer captures the period and

Re: [PATCH 0/2] extend PWM framework to support PWM dead-times

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 01:23:08PM +0300, m18063 wrote: > Hi Thierry, > > Thank you for your response. I added few comments below. > > Thank you, > Claudiu > > On 21.08.2017 11:25, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 03:15:51PM +0300, Cla

Re: [PATCH 0/2] extend PWM framework to support PWM dead-times

On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 03:15:51PM +0300, Claudiu Beznea wrote: > Hi all, > > Please give feedback on these patches which extends the PWM > framework in order to support multiple PWM signal types. > Since I didn't receive any inputs on RFC series I'm resending it as > normal patch series. > >

[PATCH] docs: driver-api: Remove trailing blank line

From: Thierry Reding <tred...@nvidia.com> There's no use for this blank line at the end of the file. Remove it. Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <tred...@nvidia.com> --- Documentation/driver-api/miscellaneous.rst | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Documentatio

Re: [PATCH v2 04/26] pwm.txt: standardize document format

On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 12:26:44PM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Each text file under Documentation follows a different > format. Some doesn't even have titles! > > Change its representation to follow the adopted standard, > using ReST markups for it to be parseable by Sphinx: > > - mark

Re: [PATCH] drm/doc: Add TODO list

On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 08:01:37PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 06:51:13PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote: > > From: Thierry Reding <tred...@nvidia.com> > > > > This commit adds a TODO list to the GPU driver developer's guide. The > > conte

[PATCH] drm/doc: Add TODO list

From: Thierry Reding <tred...@nvidia.com> This commit adds a TODO list to the GPU driver developer's guide. The content was taken from the DRMJanitors page on the X.Org wiki: https://www.x.org/wiki/DRMJanitors/ The goal is to track a list of refactorings that would be nice to see

Re: [PATCH v5 02/46] backlight: pwm_bl: remove useless call to pwm_set_period()

On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 03:16:53PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Thierry Reding wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:03:25PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > The PWM period will be set when calling pwm_config. Remove this useless > > > call to

Re: [PATCH v5 15/46] pwm: introduce the pwm_state concept

On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 03:26:44PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 15:11:18 +0200 > Thierry Reding <thierry.red...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 02:45:08PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:21

Re: [PATCH v5 05/46] pwm: introduce the pwm_args concept

On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 03:06:27PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:39:12 +0200 > Thierry Reding <thierry.red...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:03:28PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > Currently the PWM core mixes the

Re: [PATCH v5 15/46] pwm: introduce the pwm_state concept

On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 02:45:08PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:21:41 +0200 > Thierry Reding <thierry.red...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 02:17:18PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:49

Re: [PATCH v5 05/46] pwm: introduce the pwm_args concept

On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 02:04:12PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:39:12 +0200 > Thierry Reding <thierry.red...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:03:28PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > Currently the PWM core mixes the

Re: [PATCH v5 16/46] pwm: move the enabled/disabled info into pwm_state

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:03:39PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: [...] > @@ -145,7 +146,11 @@ static inline void pwm_get_state(const struct pwm_device > *pwm, > > static inline bool pwm_is_enabled(const struct pwm_device *pwm) > { > - return test_bit(PWMF_ENABLED, >flags); > + struct

Re: [PATCH v5 04/46] pwm: get rid of pwm->lock

On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 01:32:55PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > Hi Thierry, > > On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:22:46 +0200 > Thierry Reding <thierry.red...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:03:27PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > PWM devices

Re: [PATCH v5 05/46] pwm: introduce the pwm_args concept

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:03:28PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > Currently the PWM core mixes the current PWM state with the per-platform > reference config (specified through the PWM lookup table, DT definition or > directly hardcoded in PWM drivers). > > Create a pwm_args struct to store this

Re: [PATCH v5 04/46] pwm: get rid of pwm->lock

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:03:27PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > PWM devices are not protected against concurrent accesses. The lock in > pwm_device might let PWM users think it is, but it's actually only > protecting the enabled state. > > Removing this lock should be fine as long as all PWM

Re: [PATCH v5 03/46] backlight: lm3630a_bl: stop messing with the pwm->period field

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:03:26PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > pwm->period field is not supposed to be changed by PWM users. The only > ones authorized to change it are the PWM core and PWM drivers. > > Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon > --- >

Re: [PATCH v5 02/46] backlight: pwm_bl: remove useless call to pwm_set_period()

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:03:25PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > The PWM period will be set when calling pwm_config. Remove this useless > call to pwm_set_period(), which might mess up with the internal PWM state. > > Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon >

Re: [PATCH v5 01/46] pwm: rcar: make use of pwm_is_enabled()

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:03:24PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > Commit 5c31252c4a86 ("pwm: Add the pwm_is_enabled() helper") introduced a > new function to test whether a PWM device is enabled or not without > manipulating PWM internal fields. > Hiding this is necessary if we want to smoothly

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

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 08:57:18PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 10:48:01 -0700 > Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > Hi Boris, > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:03:59PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > pwm_config/enable/disable() have been

Re: [PATCH v5 34/46] clk: pwm: switch to the atomic API

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 08:57:35AM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 15:01:49 -0700 > Stephen Boyd wrote: > > > On 03/30, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-pwm.c b/drivers/clk/clk-pwm.c > > > index ebcd738..49ec5b1

Re: [PATCH v5 32/46] pwm: deprecate pwm_config(), pwm_enable() and pwm_disable()

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 08:54:54PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > Hi Dmitry, > > On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 10:38:58 -0700 > Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > Hi Boris, > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:03:55PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > Prefix those function as

Re: [PATCH v5 08/46] hwmon: pwm-fan: use pwm_get_args() where appropriate

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 09:07:09AM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > Hi Guenter, > > On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 15:52:44 -0700 > Guenter Roeck wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:03:31PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > The PWM framework has clarified the concept of reference