| Message ID | 1314116798-12755-1-git-send-email-fabio.estevam@freescale.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 01:26:38PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote: > Instead of adding the check for MX53 CPU type, use the negative logic and let > PWM to be configured for MX53 as well. Applied for next. Sascha > > Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@freescale.com> > --- > arch/arm/plat-mxc/pwm.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-mxc/pwm.c b/arch/arm/plat-mxc/pwm.c > index 761c3c9..42d74ea 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/plat-mxc/pwm.c > +++ b/arch/arm/plat-mxc/pwm.c > @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ int pwm_config(struct pwm_device *pwm, int duty_ns, int period_ns) > if (pwm == NULL || period_ns == 0 || duty_ns > period_ns) > return -EINVAL; > > - if (cpu_is_mx27() || cpu_is_mx3() || cpu_is_mx25() || cpu_is_mx51()) { > + if (!(cpu_is_mx1() || cpu_is_mx21())) { > unsigned long long c; > unsigned long period_cycles, duty_cycles, prescale; > u32 cr; > -- > 1.7.1 > > >
Hello Fabio, On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 01:26:38PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote: > Instead of adding the check for MX53 CPU type, use the negative logic and let > PWM to be configured for MX53 as well. I wonder why you prefer negative logic here. It might be shorter, but it is also less robust. For example it seems to me you not only added support for i.MX53 but also i.MX50. The IMHO best solution would be to use device ids and get rid of cpu_is_mx.. completely. Best regards Uwe > arch/arm/plat-mxc/pwm.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-mxc/pwm.c b/arch/arm/plat-mxc/pwm.c > index 761c3c9..42d74ea 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/plat-mxc/pwm.c > +++ b/arch/arm/plat-mxc/pwm.c > @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ int pwm_config(struct pwm_device *pwm, int duty_ns, int period_ns) > if (pwm == NULL || period_ns == 0 || duty_ns > period_ns) > return -EINVAL; > > - if (cpu_is_mx27() || cpu_is_mx3() || cpu_is_mx25() || cpu_is_mx51()) { > + if (!(cpu_is_mx1() || cpu_is_mx21())) { > unsigned long long c; > unsigned long period_cycles, duty_cycles, prescale; > u32 cr;
Uwe Kleine-König writes: > Hello Fabio, > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 01:26:38PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote: > > Instead of adding the check for MX53 CPU type, use the negative logic and let > > PWM to be configured for MX53 as well. > I wonder why you prefer negative logic here. It might be shorter, but it > is also less robust. For example it seems to me you not only added > support for i.MX53 but also i.MX50. > > The IMHO best solution would be to use device ids and get rid of > cpu_is_mx.. completely. > +1 Lothar Waßmann
diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-mxc/pwm.c b/arch/arm/plat-mxc/pwm.c index 761c3c9..42d74ea 100644 --- a/arch/arm/plat-mxc/pwm.c +++ b/arch/arm/plat-mxc/pwm.c @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ int pwm_config(struct pwm_device *pwm, int duty_ns, int period_ns) if (pwm == NULL || period_ns == 0 || duty_ns > period_ns) return -EINVAL; - if (cpu_is_mx27() || cpu_is_mx3() || cpu_is_mx25() || cpu_is_mx51()) { + if (!(cpu_is_mx1() || cpu_is_mx21())) { unsigned long long c; unsigned long period_cycles, duty_cycles, prescale; u32 cr;
Instead of adding the check for MX53 CPU type, use the negative logic and let PWM to be configured for MX53 as well. Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@freescale.com> --- arch/arm/plat-mxc/pwm.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)