On 3/14/2013 9:14 PM, Peter Korsgaard wrote:
>>>>>> "Sekhar" == Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@xxxxxx> writes:
>
> >> Required properties:
> >> -- compatible: Must be "ti,am33xx-ecap"
> >> +- compatible: Must be "ti,am33xx-ecap" or "ti,da850-ecap"
> >> - #pwm-cells: Should be 3. Number of cells being used to specify PWM property.
> >> First cell specifies the per-chip index of the PWM to use, the second
> >> cell is the period in nanoseconds and bit 0 in the third cell is used to
> >> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-tiecap.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-tiecap.c
> >> index 22e96e2..e0d96c8 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-tiecap.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-tiecap.c
> >> @@ -197,6 +197,7 @@ static const struct pwm_ops ecap_pwm_ops = {
> >>
> >> static const struct of_device_id ecap_of_match[] = {
> >> { .compatible = "ti,am33xx-ecap" },
> >> + { .compatible = "ti,da850-ecap" },
> >> {},
>
> Sekhar> You add a new compatible, but don't really show any changes in
> Sekhar> driver in this series. So why can't we simply use
> Sekhar> ti,am33xx-ecap on DA850 too?
>
> Indeed, if the hardware block is identical the dts should simply list:
>
> compatible = "ti,da850-ecap", "ti,am33xx-ecap"
>
> And the driver only bind to ti,am33xx-ecap (unless there ever needs to
> be a da850 specific workarounde.
Okay, so this is to future proof the DA850 DT blob. Makes sense. Thanks!
~Sekhar
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
