From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: marex@denx.de (Marek Vasut)
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 01:01:06 +0200
Subject: [PATCH v3] PWM: PXA: add device tree support to PWM driver
In-Reply-To: <52375FB1.5050700@wwwdotorg.org>
References: <1379091281-23662-1-git-send-email-mikedunn@newsguy.com>
 <52375FB1.5050700@wwwdotorg.org>
Message-ID: <201309170101.06640.marex@denx.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Dear Stephen Warren,

> On 09/13/2013 10:54 AM, Mike Dunn wrote:
> > This patch adds device tree support to the PXA's PWM driver.  Only an OF
> > match table is added; nothing needs to be extracted from the device tree
> > node.  The existing ID table is reused for the match table data.
> > 
> > Tested on a Palm Treo 680 (both platform data and DT cases).
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pxa-pwm.txt
> > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pxa-pwm.txt
> > 
> > +- compatible: should be one of:
> > +  - "marvell,pxa250-pwm"
> > +  - "marvell,pxa270-pwm"
> > +  - "marvell,pxa168-pwm"
> > +  - "marvell,pxa910-pwm"
> 
> Not just one of, but possible more than one...
> 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/pxa27x.dtsi
> > b/arch/arm/boot/dts/pxa27x.dtsi
> > 
> > +		pwm0: pwm at 40b00000 {
> > +			compatible = "marvell,pxa270-pwm";
> 
> I thought the assertion was that pax270 and pxa250 were both compatible?
> If so, that should be:
> 
> 		compatible = "marvell,pxa270-pwm", "marvell,pxa250-pwm";

I see what you mean with the compatible strings ... but if we have this 
"fallback" compatiblity string, do we also need the table of all chips sporting 
the IP block in the driver itself?

Best regards,
Marek Vasut