[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAL_JsqLOoU0gHiz7CEii3CXsGQS28u2+w5t7vxT1FStRaeObkw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 07:45:00 -0500
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel@...inux.com, Patrice Chotard <patrice.chotard@...com>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Linux PWM List <linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 17/17] dt-bindings: pwm: sti: Update DT bindings with
recent changes
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 3:35 AM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2016, Rob Herring wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:35:08AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
>> > We're renaming the 'st,pwm-num-chan' binding to 'st,pwm-num-devs' to
>> > be more inline with the naming conventions of the subsystem. Where
>> > we used to treat each line as a channel, the PWM convention is to
>> > describe them as devices.
>>
>> This is out of date now. Otherwise, the binding looks fine.
>
> Yes, you are right.
>
> Perhaps if this is okay with Thierry, he can remove these few lines.
> If not, I don't mind re-sending on request.
>
> I'll leave it until I hear otherwise.
Fine with me.
Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists