On 11/07/2012 07:12 PM, Grazvydas Ignotas wrote:
>> +static int twl4030_pwmled_config(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device
>> *pwm,
>> + int duty_ns, int period_ns)
>> +{
>> + int duty_cycle = (duty_ns * TWL4030_LED_MAX) / period_ns;
>> + u8 on_time;
>> + u8 pwm_config[2];
>> + int base, ret;
>> +
>> + if (duty_cycle >= TWL4030_LED_MAX)
>> + on_time = TWL4030_LED_MAX;
>> + else if (!duty_cycle)
>> + on_time = TWL4030_LED_MAX - 1;
>> + else
>> + on_time = TWL4030_LED_MAX - duty_cycle;
>> +
>> + base = pwm->hwpwm * 2 + TWL4030_PWMA_REG;
>> +
>> + pwm_config[0] = on_time;
>> + pwm_config[1] = TWL4030_LED_MAX;
>> +
>> + ret = twl_i2c_write(TWL4030_MODULE_LED, pwm_config, base, 2);
>
> Shouldn't this use TWL4030_MODULE_PWMA and TWL4030_MODULE_PWMB as
> first argument? I can guess it works your way too, but
> TWL4030_MODULE_PWMx would match the TRM better.
I don't have strong opinion regarding to this. You mean changing from:
base = pwm->hwpwm * 2 + TWL4030_PWMA_REG;
ret = twl_i2c_write(TWL4030_MODULE_LED, pwm_config, base, 2);
to:
if (pwm->hwpwm)
module = TWL4030_MODULE_PWMB;
else
module = TWL4030_MODULE_PWMA;
ret = twl_i2c_write(module, pwm_config, 0, 2);
But I want to note that I'm currently trying to clean up the mess around
twl-core. In my view we have quite a bit of redundancy in there. The PWM A/B
is for driving the LED A/B outputs. We should have only these modules for
PWM/LED in twl-core:
TWL_MODULE_PWM - offset for PWM0ON register in twl4030 and PWM1ON for twl6030
TWL_MODULE_LED - offset for LEDEN register in twl4030 and LED_PWM_CTRL1
for twl6030
>From here the driver can figure out what to do IMHO.
There's no need to have separate TWL 'modules' for:
TWL4030_BASEADD_PWM0
TWL4030_BASEADD_PWM1
TWL4030_BASEADD_PWMA
TWL4030_BASEADD_PWMB
--
Péter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
