[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250211070546.GY3713119@black.fi.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 09:05:46 +0200
From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Alexis GUILLEMET <alexis.guillemet@...asys.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/2] pinctrl: intel: Fix PWM initialisation
On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 09:44:49PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> It appears that PWM instantiated from pinctrl-intel is configured
> to a wrong flow. This mini-series to fix the issue. Note, patch 1
> is comprehensive documentation paragraph to explain what the difference
> in the programming flow and what the SoCs are affected.
>
> The issue had been reported privately, hence no Closes tag.
> I haven't added the Tested-by, so to make sure that it (still) works
> I ask Alexis to give the formal Tag here in a response to the series.
>
> The idea is to route this via pin control tree as there are already two patches
> against PWM handling in pinctrl-intel. There is no need to backport that, it's
> optional, because it wasn't worked from day 1, and hence no Cc: stable@.
>
> Cc: Alexis GUILLEMET<alexis.guillemet@...asys.com>
>
> Andy Shevchenko (2):
> pwm: lpss: Clarify the bypass member semantics in struct
> pwm_lpss_boardinfo
> pinctrl: intel: Fix wrong bypass assignment in
> intel_pinctrl_probe_pwm()
Both,
Reviewed-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists