From b871d093f1caebeb39b12136a33e7529b8fdea50 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?utf8?q?Uwe=20Kleine-K=C3=B6nig?= Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2025 19:18:01 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] pwm: Check actual period and duty_cycle for ignored polarity test MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit When a lowlevel driver configures the wrong period that might (historically) be ok if the emitted signal has a 100% relative duty_cycle as that just corresponds to rounding down the duty_cycle to 0 which is an allowed thing to do for a lowlevel driver. Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/bc511c0250ea2f6390e4209ab1ea9c08a3c18612.1751994988.git.u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König --- drivers/pwm/core.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/pwm/core.c b/drivers/pwm/core.c index d5d2dfbe4adec..2570ad6a7f59d 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/core.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/core.c @@ -536,7 +536,7 @@ static void pwm_apply_debug(struct pwm_device *pwm, } if (s2.polarity != state->polarity && - state->duty_cycle < state->period) + s2.duty_cycle < s2.period) dev_warn(pwmchip_parent(chip), ".apply ignored .polarity\n"); if (last->polarity == state->polarity && -- 2.47.3