Hi Stephen,
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 07:21:49AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Brian Masney (2019-05-16 01:50:18)
> > @@ -306,6 +307,36 @@
> > input-enable;
> > };
> > };
> > +
> > + vibrator_pin: vibrator {
> > + pwm {
> > + pins = "gpio27";
> > + function = "gp1_clk";
> > +
> > + drive-strength = <6>;
> > + bias-disable;
> > + };
> > +
> > + enable {
> > + pins = "gpio60";
> > + function = "gpio";
> > + };
> > + };
> > + };
> > +
> > + vibrator@fd8c3450 {
> > + compatible = "qcom,msm8974-vibrator";
> > + reg = <0xfd8c3450 0x400>;
>
> This is inside the multimedia clk controller. The resource reservation
> mechanism should be complaining loudly here. Is the driver writing
> directly into clk controller registers to adjust a duty cycle of the
> camera's general purpose clk?
>
> Can you add support for duty cycle to the qcom clk driver's RCGs and
> then write a generic clk duty cycle vibrator driver that adjusts the
> duty cycle of the clk? That would be better than reaching into the clk
> controller registers to do this.
I don't see any complaints in dmesg about this, however I'll work on a
new clk duty cycle vibrator driver.
Brian
