Hi Andy, On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 12:02:37PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Sun, Jun 06, 2021 at 11:30:54PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > Hello Andy, > > > > On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 10:49:42PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > It makes little sense to make PWM flags optional since in case > > > of multi-channel consumer the flags can be optional only for > > > the last listed channel. > > > > I think the same holds true for dt references. > > Can you elaborate this? I haven't got what you are talking about, not a DT > expert here. Ah no, I mixed that up. While the function that parses the phandle is flexible, for each pwm controller the number of arguments is fixed, so pwms = <&pwm1 100000 &pwm2 100000 &pwm3 1000000>; cannot be interpreted as 3-argument references to two PWMs. This is different to ACPI (I guess, not an ACPI expert here :-) because &pwm1 "knows" if it needs 1 or 2 additional parameters (#pwm-cells). Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
