From: Uwe Kleine-König Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2021 08:27:53 +0000 (+0200) Subject: pwm: tiecap: Ensure configuring period and duty_cycle isn't wrongly skipped X-Git-Tag: v5.14-rc2~22^2~2 X-Git-Url: http://git.ipfire.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=25f70b8f3d15b8c188ecb49c6007b86f3e775c20;p=thirdparty%2Flinux.git pwm: tiecap: Ensure configuring period and duty_cycle isn't wrongly skipped 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 --- diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-tiecap.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-tiecap.c index dec3f1fb150c9..35eb19a5a0d11 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);