On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 10:09:00AM +0000, [email protected] wrote: > From: Claudiu Beznea <[email protected]> > > Add support for SAM9X60's PWM controller. > > Signed-off-by: Claudiu Beznea <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/pwm/pwm-atmel.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-atmel.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-atmel.c > index 647d063562db..229cedb02770 100644 > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-atmel.c > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-atmel.c > @@ -52,6 +52,8 @@ > > /* Only the LSB 16 bits are significant. */ > #define PWM_MAXV1_PRD 0xFFFF > +/* All 32 bits are significant. */ > +#define PWM_MAXV2_PRD 0xFFFFFFFF > #define PRD_MAXV1_PRES 10 > > struct atmel_pwm_registers { > @@ -311,6 +313,20 @@ static const struct atmel_pwm_data atmel_pwm_data_v2 = { > }, > }; > > +static const struct atmel_pwm_data atmel_pwm_data_v3 = {
Does it make more sense to call this ..._sam9x60 to match the compatible? (If yes, patch 1 should be changed accordingly.) I wonder how the naming of the defines is chosen given that pwm_data_v3 is the first that needs PWM_MAXV2_PRD. Looks inconsistent. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
