[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a4b6c158-da56-7879-04a4-558f751cb372@linaro.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2022 14:27:00 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Tommaso Merciai <tommaso.merciai@...rulasolutions.com>
Cc: linux-amarula@...rulasolutions.com,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>,
Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@....com>,
Tim Harvey <tharvey@...eworks.com>,
Richard Zhu <hongxing.zhu@....com>, Li Jun <jun.li@....com>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: imx8mm-evk: add pwm1/backlight support
On 13/04/2022 13:58, Tommaso Merciai wrote:
>>> + backlight: backlight {
>>> + status = "disabled";
>>
>> Why disabled?
>>
>>> + compatible = "pwm-backlight";
>>> + pwms = <&pwm1 0 5000000>;
>>> + brightness-levels = <0 255>;
>>> + num-interpolated-steps = <255>;
>>> + default-brightness-level = <250>;
>>> + };
>>> +
>>> ir-receiver {
>>> compatible = "gpio-ir-receiver";
>>> gpios = <&gpio1 13 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
>>> @@ -395,6 +404,12 @@ &wdog1 {
>>> status = "okay";
>>> };
>>>
>>> +&pwm1 {
>>> + pinctrl-names = "default";
>>> + pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_backlight>;
>>> + status = "disabled";
>>
>> Same here.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>
> Hi Krzysztof,
> I think is better to keep disable into .dtsi and enable it at .dts
> level.
> What do you think about?
Why better? This is already board DTSI, not a SoC DTSI. All boards using
it are supposed to have it available, aren't they?
Usually nodes should be disabled in a DTSI if they need some resources
not available in that DTSI. For example if they need some supply. It's
not the case here, right?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists