On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 02:15:58PM +0200, Baruch Siach wrote:
> @@ -781,51 +787,80 @@ static int mvebu_pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev,
> struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> struct mvebu_pwm *mvpwm;
> void __iomem *base;
> + u32 offset;
> u32 set;
>
> - if (!of_device_is_compatible(mvchip->chip.of_node,
> - "marvell,armada-370-gpio"))
> - return 0;
> -
> - /*
> - * There are only two sets of PWM configuration registers for
> - * all the GPIO lines on those SoCs which this driver reserves
> - * for the first two GPIO chips. So if the resource is missing
> - * we can't treat it as an error.
> - */
> - if (!platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, "pwm"))
> + if (of_device_is_compatible(mvchip->chip.of_node,
> + "marvell,armada-370-gpio")) {
> + /*
> + * There are only two sets of PWM configuration registers for
> + * all the GPIO lines on those SoCs which this driver reserves
> + * for the first two GPIO chips. So if the resource is missing
> + * we can't treat it as an error.
> + */
> + if (!platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, "pwm"))
> + return 0;
> + offset = 0;
> + } else if (mvchip->soc_variant == MVEBU_GPIO_SOC_VARIANT_A8K) {
> + int ret = of_property_read_u32(dev->of_node,
> + "marvell,pwm-offset", &offset);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return 0;
The reason my patches were rejected was because I was trying to keep
compatibility with the existing DTs w.r.t the clock - and Uwe didn't
like that.
I notice that you keep compatibility by detecting the presence or
absence of the marvell,pwm-offset property which achieves the same
goal.
Also, you are missing fixing a bug in the PWM register calculations
for get_state().
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
