On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 02:28:53PM +0800, Tanwar, Rahul wrote: > On 22/5/2020 4:56 pm, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 03:41:59PM +0800, Rahul Tanwar wrote: ... > > I'm a unhappy to have this in the PWM driver. The PWM driver is supposed > > to be generic and I think this belongs into a dedicated driver. > > Well noted about all other review concerns. I will rework the driver in v2. > However, i am not very sure about the above point - of having a separate > dedicated driver for tach_work because its logic is tightly coupled with > this driver. Actually I agree with Uwe. Here is layering violation, i.e. provider and consumer in the same pot. It's not good from design perspective. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
