On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 02:15:58PM +0200, Baruch Siach wrote: > @@ -781,51 +787,80 @@ static int mvebu_pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev, > struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; > struct mvebu_pwm *mvpwm; > void __iomem *base; > + u32 offset; > u32 set; > > - if (!of_device_is_compatible(mvchip->chip.of_node, > - "marvell,armada-370-gpio")) > - return 0; > - > - /* > - * There are only two sets of PWM configuration registers for > - * all the GPIO lines on those SoCs which this driver reserves > - * for the first two GPIO chips. So if the resource is missing > - * we can't treat it as an error. > - */ > - if (!platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, "pwm")) > + if (of_device_is_compatible(mvchip->chip.of_node, > + "marvell,armada-370-gpio")) { > + /* > + * There are only two sets of PWM configuration registers for > + * all the GPIO lines on those SoCs which this driver reserves > + * for the first two GPIO chips. So if the resource is missing > + * we can't treat it as an error. > + */ > + if (!platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, "pwm")) > + return 0; > + offset = 0; > + } else if (mvchip->soc_variant == MVEBU_GPIO_SOC_VARIANT_A8K) { > + int ret = of_property_read_u32(dev->of_node, > + "marvell,pwm-offset", &offset); > + if (ret < 0) > + return 0; The reason my patches were rejected was because I was trying to keep compatibility with the existing DTs w.r.t the clock - and Uwe didn't like that. I notice that you keep compatibility by detecting the presence or absence of the marvell,pwm-offset property which achieves the same goal. Also, you are missing fixing a bug in the PWM register calculations for get_state(). -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!