* Shawn Guo wrote: > On Sun, Apr 01, 2012 at 11:20:46PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 04:30:21PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > ... > > > The "bad" > > > thing is that it'll make the "pwm-names" property mandatory if more than a > > > single PWM is requested. > > > > > You do not have to make it mandatory, but anyone requesting any pwm > > other than the first on in "pwms" list should fail. > > > I should have put it this way. If a client device does not have > "pwm-names" property in its node, it should fail when requesting pwm > with a name. And if no name is given, the first pwm device in the > "pwms" list could just be returned. Yes, that's how I understood it. =) Thierry
Attachment:
pgpZTQ7gk4ryd.pgp
Description: PGP signature
