Hi,
* David Rivshin (Allworx) [off-list ref] [160201 10:23]:
On Sat, 30 Jan 2016 15:51:06 +0100
Neil Armstrong [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
2016-01-30 5:26 GMT+01:00 David Rivshin (Allworx)
[off-list ref]:
quoted
From: David Rivshin <redacted>
After going through the math and constraints checking to compute
load and match values, it is helpful to know what the resultant
period and duty cycle are.
Signed-off-by: David Rivshin <redacted>
---
I found this helpful while testing the other changes, so I included
it in case it may be of use to someone in the future. I would have
no issues with dropping this if it's not considered worthwhile.
It's useful, but converting it as a sysfs attribute would be great !
Hrm, yes that is an interesting thought. I imagine that many PWM
devices have similar constraints, so perhaps that would be best
handled generically in the pwm core? Maybe as new optional get_*()
ops, a modification to the config() op to add output params, or just
updating new fields in the struct pwm directly?
Yeah for /sys entry it should be Linux generic. The other option
is to use debugfs for driver specific things.
Regards,
Tony