[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190522082348.GA15793@basecamp>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 04:23:48 -0400
From: Brian Masney <masneyb@...tation.org>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
Cc: agross@...nel.org, david.brown@...aro.org,
bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
mark.rutland@....com, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] ARM: dts: qcom: msm8974-hammerhead: add device
tree bindings for vibrator
Hi Stephen,
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 07:21:49AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Brian Masney (2019-05-16 01:50:18)
> > @@ -306,6 +307,36 @@
> > input-enable;
> > };
> > };
> > +
> > + vibrator_pin: vibrator {
> > + pwm {
> > + pins = "gpio27";
> > + function = "gp1_clk";
> > +
> > + drive-strength = <6>;
> > + bias-disable;
> > + };
> > +
> > + enable {
> > + pins = "gpio60";
> > + function = "gpio";
> > + };
> > + };
> > + };
> > +
> > + vibrator@...c3450 {
> > + compatible = "qcom,msm8974-vibrator";
> > + reg = <0xfd8c3450 0x400>;
>
> This is inside the multimedia clk controller. The resource reservation
> mechanism should be complaining loudly here. Is the driver writing
> directly into clk controller registers to adjust a duty cycle of the
> camera's general purpose clk?
>
> Can you add support for duty cycle to the qcom clk driver's RCGs and
> then write a generic clk duty cycle vibrator driver that adjusts the
> duty cycle of the clk? That would be better than reaching into the clk
> controller registers to do this.
I don't see any complaints in dmesg about this, however I'll work on a
new clk duty cycle vibrator driver.
Brian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists