On Sat, 01 Oct 2022, Biju Das wrote: > Hi Lee Jones, > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 3/7] dt-bindings: mfd: rz-mtu3: Document > > RZ/G2L MTU3 PWM > > > > On Thu, 29 Sep 2022, Biju Das wrote: > > > > > Hi Lee Jones, > > > > > > Thanks for the feedback. > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 3/7] dt-bindings: mfd: rz-mtu3: Document > > > > RZ/G2L MTU3 PWM > > > > > > > > On Thu, 29 Sep 2022, Biju Das wrote: > > > > > > > > > Document RZ/G2L MTU3 PWM support. It supports following pwm > > modes. > > > > > 1) PWM mode 1 > > > > > 2) PWM mode 2 > > > > > 3) Reset-synchronized PWM mode > > > > > 4) Complementary PWM mode 1 (transfer at crest) > > > > > 5) Complementary PWM mode 2 (transfer at trough) > > > > > 6) Complementary PWM mode 3 (transfer at crest and trough) > > > > > > > > Shouldn't all this go in the PWM driver binding? > > > > > > Looks like at top level MTU3 IP provides similar HW functionality > > like > > > below binding [1], where there is a core MFD driver and pwm, counter > > > and timer as child devices. > > > > Previous mistakes are not good references for what should happen in > > the present and the future. =;) > > Why do you think that reference is not a good one? I believe there > should be some reason for it. I didn't even look at it. What I "believe" is that documentation for each functionality belonging to a particular subsystem should live in subsystem's associated documentation directory and be reviewed/maintained by that subsystem's associated maintainer. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯]
