From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9D9BC433DB for ; Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:33:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 635DA230FC for ; Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:33:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727618AbgLVQdY convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Dec 2020 11:33:24 -0500 Received: from mailout.easymail.ca ([64.68.200.34]:40302 "EHLO mailout.easymail.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727608AbgLVQdX (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Dec 2020 11:33:23 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailout.easymail.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC5112415A; Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:32:42 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at emo06-pco.easydns.vpn Received: from mailout.easymail.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (emo06-pco.easydns.vpn [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 01he_5yAQHXN; Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:32:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jupiter (unknown [108.162.141.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailout.easymail.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8EF1F24157; Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:32:29 +0000 (UTC) From: Simon South To: Uwe =?utf-8?Q?Kleine-K=C3=B6nig?= Cc: linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, heiko@sntech.de, bbrezillon@kernel.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, thierry.reding@gmail.com, tpiepho@gmail.com, lee.jones@linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] pwm: rockchip: Do not start PWMs not already running References: <0acdf3a78f670a2678e03b0bbbb01aa58a11ce9a.1608407584.git.simon@simonsouth.net> <20201221090553.bopd2aaoheapww3r@pengutronix.de> Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 11:32:29 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20201221090553.bopd2aaoheapww3r@pengutronix.de> ("Uwe =?utf-8?Q?Kleine-K=C3=B6nig=22's?= message of "Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:05:53 +0100") Message-ID: <871rfhreci.fsf@simonsouth.net> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org Uwe Kleine-König writes: > "starting PWM" here means enabling their clocks, right? I wouldn't > expect that this has any effect on the output, am I right? Right, it does not; another misunderstanding on my part. I'll fix the commit message. > Just for my understanding: That you moved clk_prepare_enable(pc->pclk) > further down is not strictly necessary for your change, right? That's right. My thought was to keep the code that enables this clock close to the code that relies on it, and to minimize the duration the clock is enabled. Would it be better to leave the code where it is? > I'm not a big fan of this ?: construct... Neither was I, actually, but I guessed the shorter version would be preferred. I'm happy to change it back to match what you described. -- Simon South simon@simonsouth.net