From: Heiner Kallweit hkallweit1@gmail.com
commit 6b9352f3f8a1a35faf0efc1ad1807ee303467796 upstream.
I don't see a reason why we should treat the case lo < hi differently and return 0 as period and duty_cycle. The current logic was added with c375bcbaabdb ("pwm: meson: Read the full hardware state in meson_pwm_get_state()"), Martin as original author doesn't remember why it was implemented this way back then. So let's handle it as normal use case and also remove the optimization for lo == 0. I think the improved readability is worth it.
Fixes: c375bcbaabdb ("pwm: meson: Read the full hardware state in meson_pwm_get_state()") Reviewed-by: Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de Reviewed-by: Dmitry Rokosov ddrokosov@sberdevices.ru Acked-by: Martin Blumenstingl martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit hkallweit1@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding thierry.reding@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org --- drivers/pwm/pwm-meson.c | 14 ++------------ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
--- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-meson.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-meson.c @@ -351,18 +351,8 @@ static int meson_pwm_get_state(struct pw channel->lo = FIELD_GET(PWM_LOW_MASK, value); channel->hi = FIELD_GET(PWM_HIGH_MASK, value);
- if (channel->lo == 0) { - state->period = meson_pwm_cnt_to_ns(chip, pwm, channel->hi); - state->duty_cycle = state->period; - } else if (channel->lo >= channel->hi) { - state->period = meson_pwm_cnt_to_ns(chip, pwm, - channel->lo + channel->hi); - state->duty_cycle = meson_pwm_cnt_to_ns(chip, pwm, - channel->hi); - } else { - state->period = 0; - state->duty_cycle = 0; - } + state->period = meson_pwm_cnt_to_ns(chip, pwm, channel->lo + channel->hi); + state->duty_cycle = meson_pwm_cnt_to_ns(chip, pwm, channel->hi);
state->polarity = PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL;