From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com (Boris Brezillon)
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:02:37 +0200
Subject: [PATCH v3 1/2] drivers: pwm: pwm-atmel: switch to atomic PWM
In-Reply-To: <1490189375-20384-2-git-send-email-claudiu.beznea@microchip.com>
References: <1490189375-20384-1-git-send-email-claudiu.beznea@microchip.com>
 <1490189375-20384-2-git-send-email-claudiu.beznea@microchip.com>
Message-ID: <20170327150237.69d8523f@bbrezillon>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Hi Claudiu,

On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 15:29:34 +0200
Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@microchip.com> wrote:

>  static const struct platform_device_id atmel_pwm_devtypes[] = {
>  	{
>  		.name = "at91sam9rl-pwm",
> -		.driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t)&atmel_pwm_data_v1,
> +		.driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t)&atmel_pwm_regs_v1,
>  	}, {
>  		.name = "sama5d3-pwm",
> -		.driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t)&atmel_pwm_data_v2,
> +		.driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t)&atmel_pwm_regs_v2,
>  	}, {
>  		/* sentinel */
>  	},

Unrelated to this series, but can you prepare a patch to get rid of
this platform id table (AT91 platforms have completely switched to DT
for quite some time now).

You can also get rid of the "if (pdev->dev.of_node)" condition in
atmel_pwm_probe() since it's guaranteed to be true, otherwise the
->probe() method wouldn't be called.

Thanks,

Boris