From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758267AbcJYG7L (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Oct 2016 02:59:11 -0400 Received: from 3.mo3.mail-out.ovh.net ([46.105.44.175]:38401 "EHLO 3.mo3.mail-out.ovh.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752904AbcJYG7K (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Oct 2016 02:59:10 -0400 Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 08:58:49 +0200 From: Lukasz Majewski To: Boris Brezillon Cc: Thierry Reding , Stefan Agner , linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Fabio Estevam , Fabio Estevam , Lothar Wassmann , Bhuvanchandra DV , kernel@pengutronix.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] pwm: imx: Introduce "polarity_supported" flag to PWMv2 driver Message-ID: <20161025085849.2a0225f0@jawa> In-Reply-To: <20161025083700.342f9abe@bbrezillon> References: <1477259146-19167-1-git-send-email-l.majewski@majess.pl> <1477259146-19167-7-git-send-email-l.majewski@majess.pl> <20161024172852.40662611@bbrezillon> <20161024173410.6e641b9c@bbrezillon> <20161024231458.075ea50b@jawa> <20161025083700.342f9abe@bbrezillon> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.11.1 (GTK+ 2.24.25; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Sig_//=B6cmInJ8DQWqQWR0Kb5Yh"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Ovh-Tracer-Id: 196751011119940297 X-VR-SPAMSTATE: OK X-VR-SPAMSCORE: -100 X-VR-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrfeelvddrieeigdduudekucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuqfggjfdpvefjgfevmfevgfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddm Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --Sig_//=B6cmInJ8DQWqQWR0Kb5Yh Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Boris, > Hi Lukasz, >=20 > On Mon, 24 Oct 2016 23:14:58 +0200 > Lukasz Majewski wrote: >=20 > > Hi Boris, > >=20 > > > On Mon, 24 Oct 2016 17:28:52 +0200 > > > Boris Brezillon wrote: > > > =20 > > > > On Sun, 23 Oct 2016 23:45:46 +0200 > > > > Lukasz Majewski wrote: > > > > =20 > > > > > The need for set_polarity() function has been removed by > > > > > implementing PWM atomic support (apply() callback). > > > > >=20 > > > > > To indicate that the PWMv2 supports polarity inversion, new > > > > > flag - "polarity_supported" has been introduced. > > > > >=20 > > > > > Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski > > > > > --- > > > > > drivers/pwm/pwm-imx.c | 4 +++- > > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > >=20 > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx.c > > > > > index 02d3dfd..be3034d 100644 > > > > > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx.c > > > > > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx.c > > > > > @@ -258,6 +258,7 @@ static struct pwm_ops imx_pwm_ops_v2 =3D { > > > > > }; > > > > > =20 > > > > > struct imx_pwm_data { > > > > > + bool polarity_supported; > > > > > struct pwm_ops *pwm_ops; > > > > > }; > > > > > =20 > > > > > @@ -266,6 +267,7 @@ static struct imx_pwm_data > > > > > imx_pwm_data_v1 =3D { }; > > > > > =20 > > > > > static struct imx_pwm_data imx_pwm_data_v2 =3D { > > > > > + .polarity_supported =3D true, > > > > > .pwm_ops =3D &imx_pwm_ops_v2, > > > > > }; > > > > > =20 > > > > > @@ -313,7 +315,7 @@ static int imx_pwm_probe(struct > > > > > platform_device *pdev) imx->chip.base =3D -1; > > > > > imx->chip.npwm =3D 1; > > > > > imx->chip.can_sleep =3D true; > > > > > - if (data->pwm_ops->set_polarity) { > > > > > + if (data->polarity_supported) { =20 > > > >=20 > > > > You're still breaking backward compatibility with DTs defining > > > > #pwm-cells =3D 2. > > > >=20 > > > > Please test the #pwm-cells value before deciding which of_xlate > > > > should be used. =20 > > >=20 > > > Nevermind, I didn't look at [1] and [2]. =20 > >=20 > > Yes, some patches are required to make this code work. Especially, I > > wanted to explicitly reuse and credit work already done by > > Bhuvanchandra. > >=20 > > > But still, your series is not bisectable: this change should be > > > part of patch 5 where you remove the ->set_polarity > > > implementation. Otherwise, this means you don't support polarity > > > setting between patch 5 and 6. =20 > >=20 > > Frankly speaking, I did it on purpose, to have operations in commits > > logically separated. > >=20 > > I personally, do detest commits which blur the picture and are not > > corresponding to one single logical change - for example remove some > > large chunk of code and also add some tiny, new flag. > >=20 > > For me it is not a problem to have polarity disabled between > > patches 5 and 6, since at the end of the day we have it enabled. >=20 > It's really simple to make this series bisectable, all you have to do > is move patch 6 before patch 5. Hmm... You are right, I do wonder why I didn't get this idea from the very beginning. > This being said, I really think you > should follow Stefan's recommendation: base your changes on mainline > and switch to the atomic hook before supporting polarity setting. I will do my best :-) Best regards, =C5=81ukasz Majewski >=20 > Regards, >=20 > Boris --Sig_//=B6cmInJ8DQWqQWR0Kb5Yh Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEARECAAYFAlgPArEACgkQf9/hG2YwgjGOEwCgzgkK/XfGjalDJpzcsp4rNdGW v4oAoLAB3FEz3cNnIKMUWdV/3I37mOC0 =b+4Y -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_//=B6cmInJ8DQWqQWR0Kb5Yh--