From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: s.hauer@pengutronix.de (Sascha Hauer) Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 11:14:41 +0200 Subject: [PATCH V2 0/3] Add drivers/pwm and drivers/pwm/st_pwm.c In-Reply-To: <201106281713.16099.arnd@arndb.de> References: <201106271526.12848.arnd@arndb.de> <20110628100438.GI6069@pengutronix.de> <201106281713.16099.arnd@arndb.de> Message-ID: <20110629091441.GA9349@pengutronix.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 05:13:15PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 28 June 2011, Sascha Hauer wrote: > > > > > > Good question. If Sascha is able to come up with the patch to introduce > > > the generic layer, I think it would be good to have it go though him. > > > > Just posted a rebased and documented series again. Let's see what > > happens. The time seems good to finally get this into the kernel. > > I'd say let's go forward with your framework. The two patches currently > because they both add Makefile/Kconfig files in drivers/pwm. > > Maybe you can add Viresh's patch to your series, and wait for him > to follow up with a patch to convert it? > > I've tried to blindly do the conversion myself, but got stuck with the > definition of the platform device that has multiple pwms in it. > I wonder if it would be better to change the st-pwm platform > interface to define one platform_device for each of them. Definitely. From a quick look at the driver it seems the pwms all have a seperate register space. I can add Viresh's patch to my series once we agree on the base patch. In the meantime maybe Viresh starts converting it ;) Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |