Re: [PATCH] pwm: pca9685: fix pwm/gpio inter-operation

[Sven Van Asbroeck]

Thank you for the review, Mika ! See comments below.

On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 5:14 AM Mika Westerberg
<mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > This approach will also prevent the request of the "all" pwm channel, if any
> > other pwm channel is already in use. Is this correct behaviour?
>
> Sounds correct to me.

Something that occurred to me right after I pressed the send button:

This patch will prevent a pwm 'all channels' request if at least one
of the pwm's is in use. But it will not guard against the opposite:
after the 'all channels' pwm is requested, it will still allow requests
for other pwms/gpios !

This is identical to the old behaviour. But maybe this is an oversight
and not a feature?

Proposal:
1. prevent request of 'all channel' if any of the pwms/gpios are in use
2. prevent request of all other pwms/gpios if 'all channels' is in use

>
> Can we call it pca9685_pwm_test_and_set_inuse() following naming of
> test_and_set_bit()?

Sounds good to me.

> >
> > +static void pca9685_pwm_clear_inuse(struct pca9685 *pca, struct pwm_device *pwm)
>
> I think it might be better if you provide __pca9685_pwm_clear_inuse()
> that does not take the lock and then pca9685_pwm_clear_inuse() that just
> calls the former. Then ->

I agree, this is much cleaner.