From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <5228AC56.6020200@newsguy.com> Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2013 09:07:50 -0700 From: Mike Dunn MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] pwm: pxa: add device tree support to pwm driver References: <1378236233-15637-1-git-send-email-mikedunn@newsguy.com> <201309050011.01808.marex@denx.de> <5228A238.2090202@newsguy.com> <201309051734.40570.marex@denx.de> In-Reply-To: <201309051734.40570.marex@denx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-ID: To: Marek Vasut Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring , Thierry Reding , Haojian Zhuang , Grant Likely , Robert Jarzmik On 09/05/2013 08:34 AM, Marek Vasut wrote: >>> [...] >>> compatbile=marvell,pxa25x-pwm , no ? The lowest CPU with the block. >> >> Unless I am missing something, the compatible string does not need to >> replicate any of the existing platform_device_id names, so wouldn't >> "marvell,pxa" be better? Except for register mapping and the number of >> units present on a particular pxa variant, the peripheral is software >> compatible across all pxa processors. Plus there is the problem of the >> 'x' wildcard in "pxa25x-pwm". > > So use pxa250 ? > > My concern is once marvell comes up with PXA1048576 which will have a different > PWM unit, then what will be the name for this new one? I see. OK then, pxa250 it is. Thanks Marek, Mike From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mikedunn@newsguy.com (Mike Dunn) Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2013 09:07:50 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] pwm: pxa: add device tree support to pwm driver In-Reply-To: <201309051734.40570.marex@denx.de> References: <1378236233-15637-1-git-send-email-mikedunn@newsguy.com> <201309050011.01808.marex@denx.de> <5228A238.2090202@newsguy.com> <201309051734.40570.marex@denx.de> Message-ID: <5228AC56.6020200@newsguy.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 09/05/2013 08:34 AM, Marek Vasut wrote: >>> [...] >>> compatbile=marvell,pxa25x-pwm , no ? The lowest CPU with the block. >> >> Unless I am missing something, the compatible string does not need to >> replicate any of the existing platform_device_id names, so wouldn't >> "marvell,pxa" be better? Except for register mapping and the number of >> units present on a particular pxa variant, the peripheral is software >> compatible across all pxa processors. Plus there is the problem of the >> 'x' wildcard in "pxa25x-pwm". > > So use pxa250 ? > > My concern is once marvell comes up with PXA1048576 which will have a different > PWM unit, then what will be the name for this new one? I see. OK then, pxa250 it is. Thanks Marek, Mike From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Dunn Subject: Re: [PATCH] pwm: pxa: add device tree support to pwm driver Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2013 09:07:50 -0700 Message-ID: <5228AC56.6020200@newsguy.com> References: <1378236233-15637-1-git-send-email-mikedunn@newsguy.com> <201309050011.01808.marex@denx.de> <5228A238.2090202@newsguy.com> <201309051734.40570.marex@denx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <201309051734.40570.marex@denx.de> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Marek Vasut Cc: linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring , Thierry Reding , Haojian Zhuang , Grant Likely , Robert Jarzmik , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 09/05/2013 08:34 AM, Marek Vasut wrote: >>> [...] >>> compatbile=marvell,pxa25x-pwm , no ? The lowest CPU with the block. >> >> Unless I am missing something, the compatible string does not need to >> replicate any of the existing platform_device_id names, so wouldn't >> "marvell,pxa" be better? Except for register mapping and the number of >> units present on a particular pxa variant, the peripheral is software >> compatible across all pxa processors. Plus there is the problem of the >> 'x' wildcard in "pxa25x-pwm". > > So use pxa250 ? > > My concern is once marvell comes up with PXA1048576 which will have a different > PWM unit, then what will be the name for this new one? I see. OK then, pxa250 it is. Thanks Marek, Mike