On Mon, Mar 09, 2020 at 07:35:06PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 09, 2020 at 06:07:51PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 09, 2020 at 04:45:05PM +0000, Philippe Schenker wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2020-03-09 at 14:55 +0000, Paul Barker wrote:
> > >> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6dl-aristainetos_4.dts
> > >> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6dl-aristainetos_4.dts
> > >> index 37f80ab8ccd0..f87ac95b70bc 100644
> > >> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6dl-aristainetos_4.dts
> > >> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6dl-aristainetos_4.dts
> > >> @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@
> > >>
> > >> backlight {
> > >> compatible = "pwm-backlight";
> > >> - pwms = <&pwm1 0 5000000>;
> > >> + pwms = <&pwm1 0 5000000 0>;
> > >
> > > There is a header file existing that has PWM_POLARITY_INVERTED defined
> > > in include/dt-bindings/pwm/pwm.h. I feel we should add there a
> > > PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL instead of just using 0.
> >
> > ack.
> >
> > > But then I'm asking myself if we can't get rid of the file include/dt-
> > > bindings/pwm/pwm.h and instead use include/linux/pwm.h everywhere.
> > >
> > > Or shouldn't we use defines in devicetrees from there?
> >
> > devicetrees are supposed to be stand-alone. So yes indeed, no linux
> > includes in device tree files.
>
> Correct. I don't mind adding PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL to
> include/dt-bindings/pwm/pwm.h, I think it would increase readability.
+1 from me. Who cares enough to come up with a patch?
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
