On Mon, Sep 02, 2013 at 02:38:53AM +0000, Xiubo Li-B47053 wrote:
> > Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 4/4] Documentation: Add device tree bindings for
> > Freescale FTM PWM.
> >
> ...
> > > +
> > > +pwm0: pwm@40038000 {
> > > + compatible = "fsl,vf610-ftm-pwm";
> > > + reg = <0x40038000 0x1000>;
> > > + #pwm-cells = <3>;
> > > + clock-names = "ftm0", "ftm0_fix_sel", "ftm0_ext_sel";
> > > + clocks = <&clks VF610_CLK_FTM0>,
> > > + <&clks VF610_CLK_FTM0_FIX_SEL>,
> > > + <&clks VF610_CLK_FTM0_EXT_SEL>;
> > > + pinctrl-names = "ch0-active", "ch0-idle", "ch1-active", "ch1-
> > idle",
> > > + ....;
> > > + pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_pwm0_ch0_active>;
> > > + pinctrl-1 = <&pinctrl_pwm0_ch0_idle>;
> > > + pinctrl-2 = <&pinctrl_pwm0_ch1_active>;
> > > + pinctrl-3 = <&pinctrl_pwm0_ch1_idle>;
> > > + ...
> > > + fsl,pwm-counter-clk = "ftm0_ext_sel";
> > > + fsl,pwm-avaliable-chs = <0 3 5 6>;
> >
> > I don't think this proerty is useful. Just enable all channels. I think
> > this was mentioned before.
> >
> Yes.
> Actully this property is located in board level dts file.
> I have added and requested all the channels in SoC level dtsi file,
> and in board level dts file to tell the customer the limitation, I
> think is much safter and better.
Why should this be in the board file? A pwm that is not available should
simply not be referenced and thus be unused. No need to explicitly
disable it.
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
--
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
