> Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/4] pwm: Add Freescale FTM PWM driver support > > On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 04:17:09AM +0000, Xiubo Li-B47053 wrote: > > > Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/4] pwm: Add Freescale FTM PWM driver support > > > > > > You simply don't need the available field. You don't need to track > > > whether they are available. If a user enables a pwm which is not > > > routed out of the SoC (disabled in the iomux) simply nothing will > > > happen except for a slightly increased power consumption. > > > > > If the there is not need to explicitly specify the channels are > > available or not, so there is no doubt that the 'available' field will > > be dropt. Why I added this here is because that the 4th and 5th > > channels' pinctrls are used as UART TX and RX as I have mentioned > > before, so here if you configure these two pinctrls, the UART TX and > > RX will be polluted, there maybe some other cases like this. > > If you misconfigure your iomux then usually unexptected things happen. > That is not the problem of the PWM driver, but the problem of the one > writing the devicetree. The kernel will print a message for conflicting > iomux settings. That should be hint enough to fix it. > That sounds good. Actully there isn't any conflicting messages will be printed. I will think it over. -- Best Regards, Xiubo -- 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
