[PATCHv2 07/11] ARM: OMAP3: Beagle: use PWM_LOOKUP to initialize struct pwm_lookup
Peter Ujfalusi
peter.ujfalusi at ti.com
Tue Apr 15 00:42:03 PDT 2014
On 04/15/2014 10:14 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 10:01:44AM +0300, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
>> On 04/15/2014 12:59 AM, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni at free-electrons.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap3beagle.c | 10 ++--------
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap3beagle.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap3beagle.c
>>> index f27e1ec90b5e..54c135a5b4f7 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap3beagle.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap3beagle.c
>>> @@ -61,14 +61,8 @@
>>>
>>> static struct pwm_lookup pwm_lookup[] = {
>>> /* LEDB -> PMU_STAT */
>>> - {
>>> - .provider = "twl-pwmled",
>>> - .index = 1,
>>> - .dev_id = "leds_pwm",
>>> - .con_id = "beagleboard::pmu_stat",
>>> - .period = 7812500,
>>> - .polarity = PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL,
>>> - },
>>> + PWM_LOOKUP("twl-pwmled", 1, "leds_pwm", "beagleboard::pmu_stat",
>>> + 7812500, PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL),
>>
>> Why do you need to do this in two steps?
>> In patch 4 you removed the existing PWM_LOOKUP() and now you are adding it back.
>> Would not be simpler if you just add the two new parameters in patch 4 (the
>> 812500, PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL)?
>
> Such an approach would apply an atomic change to both the infrastructure
> and the users.
Yes, I overlooked patch 6...
Just ignore my comment.
--
Péter
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list