[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5722838B.7070309@ti.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 16:41:31 -0500
From: "Franklin S Cooper Jr." <fcooper@...com>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
CC: <thierry.reding@...il.com>, <tony@...mide.com>, <paul@...an.com>,
<t-kristo@...com>, <linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>, <vigneshr@...com>, <nsekhar@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/9] pwm: pwm-tiecap: Update dt binding document to use
proper unit address
On 04/28/2016 04:31 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 05:36:44PM -0500, Franklin S Cooper Jr wrote:
>> Replace unit address from 0 to the proper physical address.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Franklin S Cooper Jr <fcooper@...com>
>> ---
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-tiecap.txt | 6 +++---
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-tiecap.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-tiecap.txt
>> index 788da6c..1b7eec5 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-tiecap.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-tiecap.txt
>> @@ -16,21 +16,21 @@ Optional properties:
>>
>> Example:
>>
>> -ecap0: ecap@0 { /* ECAP on am33xx */
>> +ecap0: ecap@...00100 { /* ECAP on am33xx */
>> compatible = "ti,am33xx-ecap";
>> #pwm-cells = <3>;
>> reg = <0x48300100 0x80>;
>> ti,hwmods = "ecap0";
>> };
>>
>> -ecap0: ecap@0 { /* ECAP on am4372 */
>> +ecap0: ecap@...00100 { /* ECAP on am4372 */
>> compatible = "ti,am4372-ecap", "ti,am33xx-ecap";
>> #pwm-cells = <3>;
>> reg = <0x48300100 0x80>;
>> ti,hwmods = "ecap0";
>> };
>>
>> -ecap0: ecap@0 { /* ECAP on da850 */
>> +ecap0: ecap@...6000 { /* ECAP on da850 */
>> compatible = "ti,da850-ecap", "ti,am33xx-ecap";
>> #pwm-cells = <3>;
>> reg = <0x306000 0x80>;
>
> These still don't match.
>
> Rob
I apologize you made a similar comment in the past but I misinterpreted
it recently which is why I made the same mistake again. I'll fix it.
Any issue with my response to your patch two comment for why I did
things the way I did? If so I can fix it when I send my new rev.
>
>> --
>> 2.7.0
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists