From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] bus/ti-pwmss: move TI PWMSS driver from PWM to bus subsystem Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2019 12:44:48 -0700 Message-ID: <20190908194447.GM52127@atomide.com> References: <20190901225827.12301-1-david@lechnology.com> <20190901225827.12301-2-david@lechnology.com> <20190902150245.GE1445@ulmo> <20190908121524.49b4874d@archlinux> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190908121524.49b4874d@archlinux> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jonathan Cameron Cc: Thierry Reding , David Lechner , linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , =?utf-8?Q?Beno=C3=AEt?= Cousson , William Breathitt Gray , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org * Jonathan Cameron [190908 11:16]: > On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 17:02:45 +0200 > Thierry Reding wrote: > > > On Sun, Sep 01, 2019 at 05:58:22PM -0500, David Lechner wrote: > > > The TI PWMSS driver is a simple bus driver for providing power > > > power management for the PWM peripherals on TI AM33xx SoCs, namely > > > eCAP, eHRPWM and eQEP. The eQEP is a counter rather than a PWM, so > > > it does not make sense to have the bus driver in the PWM subsystem > > > since the PWMSS is not exclusive to PWM devices. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: David Lechner > > > --- > > > > > > v3 changes: > > > - none > > > v2 changes: > > > - new patch > > > > > > drivers/bus/Kconfig | 9 +++++++++ > > > drivers/bus/Makefile | 1 + > > > drivers/{pwm/pwm-tipwmss.c => bus/ti-pwmss.c} | 0 > > > drivers/pwm/Kconfig | 9 --------- > > > drivers/pwm/Makefile | 1 - > > > 5 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > rename drivers/{pwm/pwm-tipwmss.c => bus/ti-pwmss.c} (100%) > > > > Acked-by: Thierry Reding > > Do we need an immutable branch for these precursor patches to the > driver addition? It's not going to make 5.4 via my tree as cutting it > too fine so we'll be in the position of holding these in a non obvious > tree for a whole cycle. Sure an immutable branch would be nice in case of unlikely dts file conflicts. And yeah no need to try to rush to v5.4. Regards, Tony