linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: hwmon: amc6821: add PWM polarity

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250319101228.GA17979@francesco-nb>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 11:12:28 +0100
From: Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@...rry.de>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Farouk Bouabid <farouk.bouabid@...rry.de>,
	Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@...adex.com>,
	linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: hwmon: amc6821: add PWM polarity

Hello Rob and all,

On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 02:58:06PM +0100, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 07:49:22AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 07:08:00PM +0100, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > > From: Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@...adex.com>
> > > 
> > > Add property to describe the PWM-Out pin polarity.
> > 
> > Why doesn't the invert support in the pwm binding work for you? Yes, I 
> > read the discussion, but don't remember the conclusion and you need to 
> > justify it here.
> 
> This chip is not a PWM controller, it is a FAN controller.
> 
> The HW has a PWM pin output that is used to control the fan, but the
> device is not modelled as a PWM controller (correctly, given that is not
> such a device) and the OS does not control the PWM, the chip reads the
> temperature and decide the PWM duty cycle accordingly in an autonomous
> way.

Can you advise on how to move this forward? Is my explanation good
enough or some more clarification is needed? Should I send a v3
incorporating such a comment into the commit message? Anything else?

Thanks,
Francesco