All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
To: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
	linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, kernel@pengutronix.de,
	Thomas Hebb <tommyhebb@gmail.com>,
	Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@marvell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] pwm: berlin: Put channel config into driver data
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 13:09:42 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YYkThshvvjq06KNU@orome.fritz.box> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210504132537.62072-2-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 860 bytes --]

On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 03:25:35PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Instead of allocating extra data in .request() provide the needed memory
> in struct berlin_pwm_chip. This reduces the number of allocations. A side
> effect is that on suspend and resume the state for all four channels is
> always saved and restored. This is easier (and probably quicker) than
> looking up the matching pwm_device and checking its PWMF_REQUESTED bit.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
> ---
>  drivers/pwm/pwm-berlin.c | 37 ++++++-------------------------------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)

This doesn't look like a worthwhile change to me. The per-PWM channel
data was originally introduced to support exactly this type of use-case,
so I don't see why we shouldn't keep using it here.

Thierry

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-11-08 12:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-04 13:25 [PATCH 1/4] pwm: berlin: use consistent naming for variables Uwe Kleine-König
2021-05-04 13:25 ` [PATCH 2/4] pwm: berlin: Put channel config into driver data Uwe Kleine-König
2021-06-30  6:18   ` Uwe Kleine-König
2021-09-09 14:16     ` Uwe Kleine-König
2021-11-08 11:04       ` Uwe Kleine-König
2021-11-08 12:09   ` Thierry Reding [this message]
2021-11-08 13:08     ` Uwe Kleine-König
2021-05-04 13:25 ` [PATCH 3/4] pwm: berlin: Implement .apply() callback Uwe Kleine-König
2021-05-04 13:25 ` [PATCH 4/4] pwm: berlin: Don't check the return code of pwmchip_remove() Uwe Kleine-König

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=YYkThshvvjq06KNU@orome.fritz.box \
    --to=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
    --cc=jszhang@marvell.com \
    --cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=lee.jones@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tommyhebb@gmail.com \
    --cc=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.