Hello Uwe, I appreciate your suggestion to use a more standardized property name like "pwm-number" instead of vendor-specific names. Since the name "pwm-number" is present in two drivers, we could consider using this name here as an option. Or perhaps we should choose a new common name "npwms" as you suggested? Please let me know what you think about this. Best regards, Aleksandr. вт, 29 окт. 2024 г. в 11:56, Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > Hello, > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 01:27:32PM +0300, Aleksandr Shubin wrote: > > + allwinner,pwm-channels: > > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32 > > + description: The number of PWM channels configured for this instance > > + enum: [6, 9] > > I wonder if the number of channels is a property common enough that we > can use "num-pwm-channels" here instead of a vendor specific property. > Or would you suggest a different name? gpio-controller nodes have > "ngpios", so maybe "npwms"? > > A quick grep suggests we already have: > > fsl,pwm-number in mxs-pwm.yaml > st,pwm-num-chan in pwm-st.txt > snps,pwm-number in snps,dw-apb-timers-pwm2.yaml > > As a follow up this could then be used by pwmchip_alloc() to determine > the number of channels if the passed npwm value is 0. > > Best regards > Uwe
