[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YHmXPyf+XjgJs3C8@orome.fritz.box>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:55:11 +0200
From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Cc: Clemens Gruber <clemens.gruber@...ruber.com>,
linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org, Sven Van Asbroeck <TheSven73@...il.com>,
Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 4/8] dt-bindings: pwm: Support new PWM_USAGE_POWER flag
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 03:27:41PM +0200, Clemens Gruber wrote:
> Add the flag and corresponding documentation for PWM_USAGE_POWER.
>
> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Clemens Gruber <clemens.gruber@...ruber.com>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm.txt | 3 +++
> include/dt-bindings/pwm/pwm.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
Rob, what are your thoughts on this? I've been thinking about this some
more and I'm having second thoughts about putting this into device tree
because it doesn't actually describe a property of the PWM hardware but
rather a use-case specific hint. It's a bit of a gray area because this
is just part of the PWM specifier which already has use-case specific
"configuration", such as the period and the polarity.
Perhaps a better place for this is within the PWM API? We could add the
same information into struct pwm_state and then consumers that don't
care about specifics of the signal (such as pwm-backlight) can set that
flag when they request a state to be applied.
Thierry
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists