From: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
To: Jeff LaBundy <jeff@labundy.com>
Cc: "mark.rutland@arm.com" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
"lars@metafoo.de" <lars@metafoo.de>,
"pmeerw@pmeerw.net" <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
"linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-iio@vger.kernel.org" <linux-iio@vger.kernel.org>,
"dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com" <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
"robh+dt@kernel.org" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
"thierry.reding@gmail.com" <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
"kernel@pengutronix.de" <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
"linux-input@vger.kernel.org" <linux-input@vger.kernel.org>,
"lee.jones@linaro.org" <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
"jic23@kernel.org" <jic23@kernel.org>,
"knaack.h@gmx.de" <knaack.h@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] pwm: Add support for Azoteq IQS620A PWM generator
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2020 12:19:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200107111940.ymiey7npx6rrppqz@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200101223933.GB14339@labundy.com>
Hi Jeff,
On Wed, Jan 01, 2020 at 10:39:36PM +0000, Jeff LaBundy wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 22, 2019 at 10:48:51PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 21, 2019 at 03:28:01AM +0000, Jeff LaBundy wrote:
> > > Based on your other feedback, I'm moving forward under the impression that
> > > you'll still accept option (2); please let me know if I have misunderstood
> > > (thank you for being flexible).
> >
> > Yeah, that's fine. If in the end it shows that this is a bad idea we can
> > still change to (3).
>
> Sounds great. As soon as 5.5-rc5 lands this weekend, I'll rebase v3 and
> send it out.
>
> I failed to catch this in my previous reply, but the comment I've added
> to iqs620_pwm_get_state actually reads as follows:
>
> /*
> * Since the device cannot generate a 0% duty cycle, requests to do so
> * force subsequent calls to iqs620_pwm_get_state to report the output
> * as disabled with duty cycle equal to that which was in use prior to
> * the request. This is not ideal, but is the best compromise based on
> * the capabilities of the device.
> */
>
> This matches the present implementation, not your proposed comment that
> claims duty cycle is clamped to 1 / 256 ms following a request for a 0%
> duty cycle.
Yeah, if that's the mechanism that is actually implemented, that's fine
of course.
> This seems OK since the concept of a duty cycle or period aren't really
> relevant if the output is disabled in my opinion. However if you prefer
> I update iqs620_pwm_apply to clamp duty cycle to 1 / 256 ms (instead of
> leaving it untouched) in this case, please let me know.
For a disabled PWM the duty_cycle and period are not relevant, for an
enabled PWM running with 0% the period matters (at least in theory)
however.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-07 11:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-09 0:38 [PATCH v2 0/7] Add support for Azoteq IQS620A/621/622/624/625 Jeff LaBundy
2019-12-09 0:38 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] dt-bindings: Add bindings " Jeff LaBundy
2019-12-18 23:52 ` Rob Herring
2019-12-20 4:00 ` Jeff LaBundy
2019-12-24 21:55 ` Rob Herring
2020-01-01 21:32 ` Jeff LaBundy
2019-12-09 0:38 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] mfd: Add support " Jeff LaBundy
2019-12-09 0:38 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] input: keyboard: " Jeff LaBundy
2019-12-09 0:38 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] pwm: Add support for Azoteq IQS620A PWM generator Jeff LaBundy
2019-12-09 7:32 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2019-12-10 0:03 ` Jeff LaBundy
2019-12-10 7:22 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2019-12-15 20:36 ` Jeff LaBundy
2019-12-16 9:19 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2019-12-20 3:19 ` Jeff LaBundy
2019-12-20 8:59 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2019-12-21 3:28 ` Jeff LaBundy
2019-12-22 21:48 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2020-01-01 22:39 ` Jeff LaBundy
2020-01-07 11:19 ` Uwe Kleine-König [this message]
2020-01-10 4:29 ` Jeff LaBundy
2020-01-10 7:25 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2019-12-09 0:38 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] iio: temperature: Add support for Azoteq IQS620AT temperature sensor Jeff LaBundy
2019-12-15 16:34 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-12-09 0:38 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] iio: light: Add support for Azoteq IQS621/622 ambient light sensors Jeff LaBundy
2019-12-15 16:47 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-12-09 0:38 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] iio: position: Add support for Azoteq IQS624/625 angle sensors Jeff LaBundy
2019-12-15 16:53 ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-01-01 22:51 ` Jeff LaBundy
2020-01-02 7:57 ` Lee Jones
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=20200107111940.ymiey7npx6rrppqz@pengutronix.de \
--to=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=jeff@labundy.com \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=knaack.h@gmx.de \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=lee.jones@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=pmeerw@pmeerw.net \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).