pwm: Ensure pwm_apply_state() doesn't modify the state argument

It is surprising for a PWM consumer when the variable holding the
requested state is modified by pwm_apply_state(). Consider for example a
driver doing:

        #define PERIOD 5000000
        #define DUTY_LITTLE 10
        ...
        struct pwm_state state = {
                .period = PERIOD,
                .duty_cycle = DUTY_LITTLE,
                .polarity = PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL,
                .enabled = true,
        };

        pwm_apply_state(mypwm, &state);
        ...
        state.duty_cycle = PERIOD / 2;
        pwm_apply_state(mypwm, &state);

For sure the second call to pwm_apply_state() should still have
state.period = PERIOD and not something the hardware driver chose for a
reason that doesn't necessarily apply to the second call.

So declare the state argument as a pointer to a const type and adapt all
drivers' .apply callbacks.

Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c
index 83c7627868d8..73352e6fbccb 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c
+++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-rockchip.c
@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ static void rockchip_pwm_get_state(struct pwm_chip *chip,
 }
 
 static void rockchip_pwm_config(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
-			       struct pwm_state *state)
+			       const struct pwm_state *state)
 {
 	struct rockchip_pwm_chip *pc = to_rockchip_pwm_chip(chip);
 	unsigned long period, duty;
@@ -183,7 +183,7 @@ static int rockchip_pwm_enable(struct pwm_chip *chip,
 }
 
 static int rockchip_pwm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
-			      struct pwm_state *state)
+			      const struct pwm_state *state)
 {
 	struct rockchip_pwm_chip *pc = to_rockchip_pwm_chip(chip);
 	struct pwm_state curstate;