[PATCH v4 2/2] pwm: rockchip: Added to support for RK3288 SoC
caesar
caesar.wang at rock-chips.com
Thu Aug 7 06:55:24 PDT 2014
Thierry,
在 2014年08月07日 21:14, Thierry Reding 写道:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 09:04:30PM +0800, caesar wrote:
> [...]
>> As you say, I will rewrite the about if it's really need do so it.
>> For example:
>>
>> static const struct rockchip_pwm_data pwm_data_v1 = {
>> .regs = {
>> .duty = 0x04,
>> .period = 0x08,
>> .cntr = 0x00,
>> .ctrl = 0x0c,
>> },
>> .prescaler = 2,
>> .set_enable = rockchip_pwm_set_enable_v1,
>> };
>>
>> static const struct rockchip_pwm_data pwm_data_v2 = {
>> .regs = {
>> .duty = 0x08,
>> .period = 0x04,
>> .cntr = 0x00,
>> .ctrl = 0x0c,
>> },
>> .prescaler = 1,
>> .set_enable = rockchip_pwm_set_enable_v2,
>> };
>>
>> static const struct rockchip_pwm_data pwm_data_vop = {
>> .regs = {
>> .duty = 0x08,
>> .period = 0x04,
>> .cntr = 0x0c,
>> .ctrl = 0x00,
>> },
>> .prescaler = 1,
>> .set_enable = rockchip_pwm_set_enable_v2,
>> };
>>
>> Is that right?
> Yes.
>
>>>> + .set_enable = rockchip_pwm_set_enable_v2,
>>>> +};
>>> No need for the double indirection.
>> Sorry, I think is need if you mean a double indirection for ".set_enable".
> The "double indirection" was regarding the symbolic names for registers,
> not the .set_enable(). Sorry.
OK,I will fix the about in patch v5 tomorrow if no other problems,Thanks!
> Thierry
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list