From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: lost.distance@yahoo.com (Paul Parsons) Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 12:01:22 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: pxa: hx4700: Fix backlight PWM device number In-Reply-To: <20120926060337.GB27855@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de> References: <5062652A.8070603@yahoo.com> <20120926060337.GB27855@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de> Message-ID: <5062E082.2010503@yahoo.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hello Thierry, On 26/09/12 07:03, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 03:15:06AM +0100, Paul Parsons wrote: >> Recent changes to PXA PWM support changed the PXA27X PWM device >> numbering scheme. >> >> The linux-3.5 PXA PWM driver followed the hardware numbering scheme for >> the 4 PWMs, while the linux-3.6-rc1 PXA PWM driver has adopted a linear >> numbering scheme: >> >> Address Hardware 3.5 pwm_id 3.6-rc1 pwm_id >> 0x40b00000 PWM0 0 0 >> 0x40b00010 PWM2 2 1 >> 0x40c00000 PWM1 1 2 >> 0x40c00010 PWM3 3 3 >> >> The hx4700 backlight uses PWM1 at 0x40c00000. Consequently the pwm_id >> must be changed from 1 to 2. >> >> Signed-off-by: Paul Parsons >> Cc: Thierry Reding >> --- >> arch/arm/mach-pxa/hx4700.c | 2 +- >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > I wasn't aware of this difference. Sorry for breaking your board. While > at it, would you mind converting this to the new style PWM lookup table? > > You can find the information in Documentation/pwm.txt, but it should be > roughly something like this: > > static struct pwm_lookup hx4700_pwm_lookup[] = { > PWM_LOOKUP("pxa27x-pwm.1", 0, "pwm-backlight", NULL), > }; > > You can then call: > > pwm_add_table(hx4700_pwm_lookup, ARRAY_SIZE(hx4700_pwm_lookup)); > > from hx4700_init(). The pwm-backlight driver will then be able to use > the new pwm_get() to obtain the PWM device. Note that pwm_request() will > go away sometime soon, so this conversion will have to be done anyway. > If you do it now I won't have to take care of it anymore. =) OK, will do. BTW, it is possible that the changed numbering scheme will also have broken three other PXA27X/PXA3XX boards which use PWM1 or PWM2: cm-x300 tavorevb z2 Unfortunately I have no way of testing these. Regards, Paul