lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Oct]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: pwm: Add binding for RPi firmware PWM bus
From
Date
On Tue, 2020-10-13 at 14:08 +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 12:35:38PM +0200, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote:
> > Hi Uwe, thanks for having a look at this.
> >
> > On Mon, 2020-10-12 at 09:01 +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 05:30:28PM +0200, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote:
> > > > The PWM bus controlling the fan in RPi's official PoE hat can only be
> > > > controlled by the board's co-processor.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzjulienne@suse.de>
> > > > ---
> > > > .../arm/bcm/raspberrypi,bcm2835-firmware.yaml | 21 +++++++++++++++++++
> > > > .../pwm/raspberrypi,firmware-pwm.h | 13 ++++++++++++
> > > > 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+)
> > > > create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/pwm/raspberrypi,firmware-pwm.h
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/raspberrypi,bcm2835-firmware.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/raspberrypi,bcm2835-firmware.yaml
> > > > index a2c63c8b1d10..dcaf00e8602e 100644
> > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/raspberrypi,bcm2835-firmware.yaml
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/raspberrypi,bcm2835-firmware.yaml
> > > > @@ -64,6 +64,22 @@ properties:
> > > > - compatible
> > > > - "#reset-cells"
> > > >
> > > > + pwm:
> > > > + type: object
> > > > +
> > > > + properties:
> > > > + compatible:
> > > > + const: raspberrypi,firmware-pwm
> > > > +
> > > > + "#pwm-cells":
> > > > + const: 1
> > > > + description: >
> > > > + The argument is the PWM bus number.
> > >
> > > This is wrong. #pwm-cells specifies the number of "arguments" for
> > > phandles pointing to this node. And I would prefer this being 2 to match
> > > the stuff described in the generic pwm binding.
> >
> > I saw buses out there with the same limitation as this one (unable to change
> > frequency) that used a single cell, so I whent with it. That said I'll be happy
> > to change it and drop the custom *_xlate() function in benefit of the default
> > one.
>
> As the first cell after the phandle is for the period and only the
> second if for flags, this is a poor argument.

In that case aren't these bindings wrong (and associated xlate() functions)?

google,cros-ec-pwm.yaml:
[...]
properties:
compatible:
const: google,cros-ec-pwm
"#pwm-cells":
description: The cell specifies the PWM index.
const: 1
[...]

cirrus,clps711x-pwm.txt:
[...]
- #pwm-cells: Should be 1. The cell specifies the index of the channel.
[...]

Note that pxa-pwm.txt behaves as you comment.

Ultimately note that in of_pwm_simple_xlate() the second argument is used to
assign the pwm period, the first one is passed as an index to
pwm_request_from_chip().

> So yes, use #pwm-cells = <2> and drop the custom xlate() function please.

I'll still go this way nontheless. Just want to make sure I understand things
correctly.

Regards,
Nicolas

[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-10-13 14:34    [W:0.142 / U:0.156 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site