From: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>
To: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>
Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>,
devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: New driver for GPO emulation using PWM generators
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 11:30:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50B344D6.8030608@metafoo.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50AF4584.7020604@ti.com>
On 11/23/2012 10:44 AM, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> Hi Grant,
>
> On 11/23/2012 10:13 AM, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
>> Hi Grant,
>>
>> On 11/23/2012 08:55 AM, Grant Likely wrote:
>>> Ugh. and this is why I wanted the PWM and GPIO subsystems to use the
>>> same namespace and binding. <grumble, mutter> But that's not your fault.
>>>
>>> It's pretty horrible to have a separate translator node to convert a PWM
>>> into a GPIO (with output only of course). The gpio properties should
>>> appear directly in the PWM node itself and the translation code should
>>> be in either the pwm or the gpio core. I don't think it should look like
>>> a separate device.
>>
>> Let me see if I understand your suggestion correctly. In the DT you suggest
>> something like this:
>>
>> twl_pwmled: pwmled {
>> compatible = "ti,twl4030-pwmled";
>> #pwm-cells = <2>;
>> #gpio-cells = <2>;
>> gpio-controller;
>> };
>
> After I thought about this.. Is this what we really want?
> After all what we have here is a PWM generator used to emulate a GPIO signal.
> The PWM itself can be used for driving a LED (standard LED or backlight and we
> have DT bindings for these already), vibra motor, or other things.
> If we combine the PWM with GPIO we should go and 'bloat' the DT node to also
> include all sort of other uses of PWM at once?
>
> IMHO it is better to keep them as separate things.
> pwm node to describe the PWM generator,
> separate nodes to describe it's uses like led, backlight, motor and gpio.
>
The difference here is that the LED, backlight, etc are all different
physical devices begin driven by the pwm pin, so it makes sense to have a
device tree node for them, while using the pwm as gpio is just a different
function of the same physical pin. So in a sense the pwm controller also
becomes a gpio controller. I like the idea of the pwm core automatically
instantiating a pwm-gpo device if it sees a gpio-controller property in the
pwm device devicetree node.
- Lars
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-11-26 10:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-11-22 13:42 [PATCH] gpio: New driver for GPO emulation using PWM generators Peter Ujfalusi
2012-11-22 13:42 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2012-11-23 7:55 ` Grant Likely
2012-11-23 9:13 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2012-11-23 9:13 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2012-11-23 9:44 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2012-11-23 9:44 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2012-11-26 10:30 ` Lars-Peter Clausen [this message]
2012-11-26 11:36 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2012-11-26 11:36 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2012-11-26 15:46 ` Grant Likely
2012-11-28 8:54 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2012-11-28 8:54 ` Peter Ujfalusi
[not found] ` <50B5D161.6010200-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
2012-11-28 19:30 ` Thierry Reding
2012-11-28 19:30 ` Thierry Reding
2012-11-29 12:18 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2012-11-29 12:18 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2012-11-28 21:02 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2012-11-29 16:10 ` Grant Likely
2012-11-30 6:47 ` Thierry Reding
2012-11-30 10:20 ` Grant Likely
2012-11-30 10:47 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2012-11-30 10:47 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2012-11-30 11:04 ` Thierry Reding
2012-11-30 11:09 ` Grant Likely
2012-11-30 11:00 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2012-11-30 11:00 ` Peter Ujfalusi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=50B344D6.8030608@metafoo.de \
--to=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peter.ujfalusi@ti.com \
--cc=rob@landley.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.