On Mon, Sep 02, 2013 at 02:38:53AM +0000, Xiubo Li-B47053 wrote: > > Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 4/4] Documentation: Add device tree bindings for > > Freescale FTM PWM. > > > ... > > > + > > > +pwm0: pwm@40038000 { > > > + compatible = "fsl,vf610-ftm-pwm"; > > > + reg = <0x40038000 0x1000>; > > > + #pwm-cells = <3>; > > > + clock-names = "ftm0", "ftm0_fix_sel", "ftm0_ext_sel"; > > > + clocks = <&clks VF610_CLK_FTM0>, > > > + <&clks VF610_CLK_FTM0_FIX_SEL>, > > > + <&clks VF610_CLK_FTM0_EXT_SEL>; > > > + pinctrl-names = "ch0-active", "ch0-idle", "ch1-active", "ch1- > > idle", > > > + ....; > > > + pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_pwm0_ch0_active>; > > > + pinctrl-1 = <&pinctrl_pwm0_ch0_idle>; > > > + pinctrl-2 = <&pinctrl_pwm0_ch1_active>; > > > + pinctrl-3 = <&pinctrl_pwm0_ch1_idle>; > > > + ... > > > + fsl,pwm-counter-clk = "ftm0_ext_sel"; > > > + fsl,pwm-avaliable-chs = <0 3 5 6>; > > > > I don't think this proerty is useful. Just enable all channels. I think > > this was mentioned before. > > > Yes. > Actully this property is located in board level dts file. > I have added and requested all the channels in SoC level dtsi file, > and in board level dts file to tell the customer the limitation, I > think is much safter and better. Why should this be in the board file? A pwm that is not available should simply not be referenced and thus be unused. No need to explicitly disable it. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html