RE: [PWM PATCH 1/5] API to consolidate PWM devices behind a common user and kernel interface

[H Hartley Sweeten]

On Tuesday, February 02, 2010 12:15 AM, Bill Gatliff wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Bill Gatliff <bgat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  Documentation/pwm.txt   |  260 +++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/pwm/pwm.c       |  633 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  include/linux/pwm.h     |   31 ---
>  include/linux/pwm/pwm.h |  170 +++++++++++++
>  4 files changed, 1063 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/pwm.txt
>  create mode 100644 drivers/pwm/pwm.c
>  delete mode 100644 include/linux/pwm.h
>  create mode 100644 include/linux/pwm/pwm.h

A couple quick comments, more after a better review.

[snip]

> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..f369384
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm.c

[snip]

> +int pwm_unregister(struct pwm_device *pwm)
> +{

[snip]

> +	for (wchan = 0; wchan < pwm->nchan; wchan++) {
> +		if (pwm->channels[wchan].flags & FLAG_REQUESTED) {

Shouldn't this be:

	& BIT(FLAG_REQUESTED)

[snip]

> diff --git a/include/linux/pwm/pwm.h b/include/linux/pwm/pwm.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..848cd76
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/linux/pwm/pwm.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,170 @@
> +#ifndef __LINUX_PWM_H
> +#define __LINUX_PWM_H

Nitpick... Can you move the #ifndef/#define to after the comment?

Regards,
Hartley
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/