diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | drivers/pwm/core.c | 32 |
1 files changed, 20 insertions, 12 deletions
diff --git a/drivers/pwm/core.c b/drivers/pwm/core.c index bff0057d87a4..d5d2dfbe4ade 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/core.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/core.c @@ -497,6 +497,13 @@ static void pwm_apply_debug(struct pwm_device *pwm, return; /* + * If a disabled PWM was requested the result is unspecified, so nothing + * to check. + */ + if (!state->enabled) + return; + + /* * *state was just applied. Read out the hardware state and do some * checks. */ @@ -508,15 +515,22 @@ static void pwm_apply_debug(struct pwm_device *pwm, return; /* + * If the PWM was disabled that's maybe strange but there is nothing + * that can be sensibly checked then. So return early. + */ + if (!s1.enabled) + return; + + /* * The lowlevel driver either ignored .polarity (which is a bug) or as * best effort inverted .polarity and fixed .duty_cycle respectively. * Undo this inversion and fixup for further tests. */ - if (s1.enabled && s1.polarity != state->polarity) { + if (s1.polarity != state->polarity) { s2.polarity = state->polarity; s2.duty_cycle = s1.period - s1.duty_cycle; s2.period = s1.period; - s2.enabled = s1.enabled; + s2.enabled = true; } else { s2 = s1; } @@ -525,8 +539,7 @@ static void pwm_apply_debug(struct pwm_device *pwm, state->duty_cycle < state->period) dev_warn(pwmchip_parent(chip), ".apply ignored .polarity\n"); - if (state->enabled && s2.enabled && - last->polarity == state->polarity && + if (last->polarity == state->polarity && last->period > s2.period && last->period <= state->period) dev_warn(pwmchip_parent(chip), @@ -537,13 +550,12 @@ static void pwm_apply_debug(struct pwm_device *pwm, * Rounding period up is fine only if duty_cycle is 0 then, because a * flat line doesn't have a characteristic period. */ - if (state->enabled && s2.enabled && state->period < s2.period && s2.duty_cycle) + if (state->period < s2.period && s2.duty_cycle) dev_warn(pwmchip_parent(chip), ".apply is supposed to round down period (requested: %llu, applied: %llu)\n", state->period, s2.period); - if (state->enabled && - last->polarity == state->polarity && + if (last->polarity == state->polarity && last->period == s2.period && last->duty_cycle > s2.duty_cycle && last->duty_cycle <= state->duty_cycle) @@ -553,16 +565,12 @@ static void pwm_apply_debug(struct pwm_device *pwm, s2.duty_cycle, s2.period, last->duty_cycle, last->period); - if (state->enabled && s2.enabled && state->duty_cycle < s2.duty_cycle) + if (state->duty_cycle < s2.duty_cycle) dev_warn(pwmchip_parent(chip), ".apply is supposed to round down duty_cycle (requested: %llu/%llu, applied: %llu/%llu)\n", state->duty_cycle, state->period, s2.duty_cycle, s2.period); - if (!state->enabled && s2.enabled && s2.duty_cycle > 0) - dev_warn(pwmchip_parent(chip), - "requested disabled, but yielded enabled with duty > 0\n"); - /* reapply the state that the driver reported being configured. */ err = chip->ops->apply(chip, pwm, &s1); trace_pwm_apply(pwm, &s1, err); |