From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753275AbbAEBkX (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Jan 2015 20:40:23 -0500 Received: from mail-wg0-f43.google.com ([74.125.82.43]:45881 "EHLO mail-wg0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752963AbbAEBkV (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Jan 2015 20:40:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1419979410-7589-1-git-send-email-jonathar@broadcom.com> <1419979410-7589-3-git-send-email-jonathar@broadcom.com> Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2015 17:33:06 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] pwm: kona: Remove setting default smooth type and polarity for all channels From: Tim Kryger To: Jonathan Richardson Cc: Scott Branden , Arun Ramamurthy , Thierry Reding , Ray Jui , bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Tim Kryger wrote: > On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Jonathan Richardson > wrote: >> Setting the default polarity in probe to normal for all channels caused >> the speaker pwm channel to click. The polarity does need to be set to >> normal because the hw default is inversed whereas the pwm framework >> defaults to normal. If a channel is enabled without setting the polarity >> then the signal would be inversed while linux reports normal. A check >> is now done prior to enabling the channel to ensure that the hw polarity >> matches the desired polarity and is changed if there is a discrepency. This >> prevents unnecessary settings being applied to unused channels but still >> ensures the correct polarity to be set. > > A more direct solution that avoids the potentially undesirable > consequences of delaying when polarity changes are written to hardware > would be to update the PWM framework to allow for the registration of > chips with inversed default polarity. > > I will post a patch for your review. Please see: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/1/4/199