[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdYTaM+sBs-bhaXVtAwFtp6+_PWWJ_k9jobd7qB41HubDg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 00:29:29 +0200
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Brian Masney <masneyb@...tation.org>
Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
"thierry.reding@...il.com" <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
David Brown <david.brown@...aro.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
MSM <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] ARM: dts: qcom: msm8974-hammerhead: add device
tree bindings for vibrator
On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 12:53 PM Brian Masney <masneyb@...tation.org> wrote:
> 2) Do what Linus suggests above. We can use v1 of this series from last
> September (see below for link) that adds this to the pwm subsystem.
> The locking would need to be added so that it won't conflict with the
> clk subsystem. This can be tied into the input subsystem with the
> existing pwm-vibra driver.
What I imagined was that the clk driver would double as a pwm driver.
Just register both interfaces.
There are already plenty of combines clk+reset drivers for example.
Otherwise I'm all for this approach (but that's just me).
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Powered by blists - more mailing lists