From 25f70b8f3d15b8c188ecb49c6007b86f3e775c20 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Uwe=20Kleine-K=C3=B6nig?= Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2021 10:27:53 +0200 Subject: pwm: tiecap: Ensure configuring period and duty_cycle isn't wrongly skipped MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit As the last call to ecap_pwm_apply() might have exited early if state->enabled was false, the values for period and duty_cycle stored in pwm->state might not have been written to hardware and it must be ensured that they are configured before enabling the PWM. Fixes: 0ca7acd84766 ("pwm: tiecap: Implement .apply() callback") Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding --- drivers/pwm/pwm-tiecap.c | 15 ++++++--------- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) (limited to 'drivers/pwm') diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-tiecap.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-tiecap.c index dec3f1fb150c..35eb19a5a0d1 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-tiecap.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-tiecap.c @@ -189,16 +189,13 @@ static int ecap_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm, return 0; } - if (state->period != pwm->state.period || - state->duty_cycle != pwm->state.duty_cycle) { - if (state->period > NSEC_PER_SEC) - return -ERANGE; + if (state->period > NSEC_PER_SEC) + return -ERANGE; - err = ecap_pwm_config(chip, pwm, state->duty_cycle, - state->period, enabled); - if (err) - return err; - } + err = ecap_pwm_config(chip, pwm, state->duty_cycle, + state->period, enabled); + if (err) + return err; if (!enabled) return ecap_pwm_enable(chip, pwm); -- cgit v1.2.3