[PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: pwm: Document Tegra194 and Tegra264 controllers

[PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: pwm: Document Tegra194 and Tegra264 controllers

[Thierry Reding]

From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>

The PWM controller found on Tegra264 is largely compatible with the one
on prior generations, but it comes with some extra features, hence a new
compatible string is needed.

Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml
index 41cea4979132..15706d2a808d 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml
@@ -16,6 +16,8 @@ properties:
       - enum:
           - nvidia,tegra20-pwm
           - nvidia,tegra186-pwm
+          - nvidia,tegra194-pwm
+          - nvidia,tegra264-pwm
 
       - items:
           - enum:
-- 
2.52.0

[PATCH 2/2] arm64: tegra: Add PWM controllers on Tegra264

[Thierry Reding]

From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>

Tegra264 has a number of PWM controller which are similar to those found
on earlier chips but with some added functionality.

Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
---
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra264.dtsi | 72 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 72 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra264.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra264.dtsi
index efb4d21aa4e3..61c001fd2651 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra264.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra264.dtsi
@@ -3344,6 +3344,18 @@ i2c3: i2c@c610000 {
 			status = "disabled";
 		};
 
+		pwm4: pwm@c6a0000 {
+			compatible = "nvidia,tegra264-pwm";
+			reg = <0x0 0xc6a0000 0x0 0x10000>;
+			status = "disabled";
+
+			clocks = <&bpmp TEGRA264_CLK_PWM4>;
+			resets = <&bpmp TEGRA264_RESET_PWM4>;
+			reset-names = "pwm";
+
+			#pwm-cells = <2>;
+		};
+
 		pmc: pmc@c800000 {
 			compatible = "nvidia,tegra264-pmc";
 			reg = <0x0 0x0c800000 0x0 0x100000>,
@@ -3579,6 +3591,66 @@ i2c16: i2c@c430000 {
 			status = "disabled";
 		};
 
+		pwm2: pwm@c5e0000 {
+			compatible = "nvidia,tegra264-pwm";
+			reg = <0x0 0xc5e0000 0x0 0x10000>;
+			status = "disabled";
+
+			clocks = <&bpmp TEGRA264_CLK_PWM2>;
+			resets = <&bpmp TEGRA264_RESET_PWM2>;
+			reset-names = "pwm";
+
+			#pwm-cells = <2>;
+		};
+
+		pwm3: pwm@c5f0000 {
+			compatible = "nvidia,tegra264-pwm";
+			reg = <0x0 0xc5f0000 0x0 0x10000>;
+			status = "disabled";
+
+			clocks = <&bpmp TEGRA264_CLK_PWM3>;
+			resets = <&bpmp TEGRA264_RESET_PWM3>;
+			reset-names = "pwm";
+
+			#pwm-cells = <2>;
+		};
+
+		pwm5: pwm@c600000 {
+			compatible = "nvidia,tegra264-pwm";
+			reg = <0x0 0xc600000 0x0 0x10000>;
+			status = "disabled";
+
+			clocks = <&bpmp TEGRA264_CLK_PWM5>;
+			resets = <&bpmp TEGRA264_RESET_PWM5>;
+			reset-names = "pwm";
+
+			#pwm-cells = <2>;
+		};
+
+		pwm9: pwm@c610000 {
+			compatible = "nvidia,tegra264-pwm";
+			reg = <0x0 0xc610000 0x0 0x10000>;
+			status = "disabled";
+
+			clocks = <&bpmp TEGRA264_CLK_PWM9>;
+			resets = <&bpmp TEGRA264_RESET_PWM9>;
+			reset-names = "pwm";
+
+			#pwm-cells = <2>;
+		};
+
+		pwm10: pwm@c620000 {
+			compatible = "nvidia,tegra264-pwm";
+			reg = <0x0 0xc620000 0x0 0x10000>;
+			status = "disabled";
+
+			clocks = <&bpmp TEGRA264_CLK_PWM10>;
+			resets = <&bpmp TEGRA264_RESET_PWM10>;
+			reset-names = "pwm";
+
+			#pwm-cells = <2>;
+		};
+
 		i2c0: i2c@c630000 {
 			compatible = "nvidia,tegra264-i2c";
 			reg = <0x00 0x0c630000 0x0 0x10000>;
-- 
2.52.0

Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: pwm: Document Tegra194 and Tegra264 controllers

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 12:40:55AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> 
> The PWM controller found on Tegra264 is largely compatible with the one
> on prior generations, but it comes with some extra features, hence a new
> compatible string is needed.

Extra features means devices are compatible.

You also always need a new compatible even without extra features, so
last part is just confusing. Suggests like you could skip new
compatible.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml
> index 41cea4979132..15706d2a808d 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml
> @@ -16,6 +16,8 @@ properties:
>        - enum:
>            - nvidia,tegra20-pwm
>            - nvidia,tegra186-pwm
> +          - nvidia,tegra194-pwm

Not explained in commit msg and it's a duplicated compatible.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: pwm: Document Tegra194 and Tegra264 controllers

[Thierry Reding]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1002 bytes --]

On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 11:47:59AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 12:40:55AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> > 
> > The PWM controller found on Tegra264 is largely compatible with the one
> > on prior generations, but it comes with some extra features, hence a new
> > compatible string is needed.
> 
> Extra features means devices are compatible.
> 
> You also always need a new compatible even without extra features, so
> last part is just confusing. Suggests like you could skip new
> compatible.

Erm... if the hardware was exactly identical, then there'd be no need
for a new compatible string. It's certainly good practice to add one
anyway, but what's the point in having 10 different compatible strings
for exactly the same hardware?

In this case the new compatible string is necessary so that we can take
advantage of the new features that are not covered yet by an existing
binding.

Thierry

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: pwm: Document Tegra194 and Tegra264 controllers

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 23/03/2026 15:45, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 11:47:59AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 12:40:55AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>> From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
>>>
>>> The PWM controller found on Tegra264 is largely compatible with the one
>>> on prior generations, but it comes with some extra features, hence a new
>>> compatible string is needed.
>>
>> Extra features means devices are compatible.
>>
>> You also always need a new compatible even without extra features, so
>> last part is just confusing. Suggests like you could skip new
>> compatible.
> 
> Erm... if the hardware was exactly identical, then there'd be no need
> for a new compatible string. It's certainly good practice to add one
> anyway, but what's the point in having 10 different compatible strings
> for exactly the same hardware?

Because integration is different. Nothing new here, DT maintainers
request it for years and is since long time documented in writing bindings.


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: pwm: Document Tegra194 and Tegra264 controllers

[Thierry Reding]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2013 bytes --]

On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 04:00:54PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 23/03/2026 15:45, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 11:47:59AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 12:40:55AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> >>> From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> >>>
> >>> The PWM controller found on Tegra264 is largely compatible with the one
> >>> on prior generations, but it comes with some extra features, hence a new
> >>> compatible string is needed.
> >>
> >> Extra features means devices are compatible.
> >>
> >> You also always need a new compatible even without extra features, so
> >> last part is just confusing. Suggests like you could skip new
> >> compatible.
> > 
> > Erm... if the hardware was exactly identical, then there'd be no need
> > for a new compatible string. It's certainly good practice to add one
> > anyway, but what's the point in having 10 different compatible strings
> > for exactly the same hardware?
> 
> Because integration is different. Nothing new here, DT maintainers
> request it for years and is since long time documented in writing bindings.

It's more subtle than that. The reason why we want a specific compatible
string is because the different integration might potentially introduce
a bug that we might, potentially, have to work around at some point
using a specific compatible string. If the hardware is backwards-
compatible and the driver can match on an existing compatible string and
work, there's no requirement for an extra, more specific compatible.

What you describe is good practice, and I agree it's a good idea. But if
we had chosen to not implement the new features and not update the
bindings and instead reuse any of the existing compatible strings,
nobody would've care one bit.

Heck, if your position is that you *need* a new compatible for every new
integration, there'd be no point in even having fallback compatible
strings in the first place.

Thierry

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: pwm: Document Tegra194 and Tegra264 controllers

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 12:40:55AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> 
> The PWM controller found on Tegra264 is largely compatible with the one
> on prior generations, but it comes with some extra features, hence a new
> compatible string is needed.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

Where is the driver patch? Why this is not being part of driver
submission (see also submitting bindings DT in description how patches
should be sent)?

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: pwm: Document Tegra194 and Tegra264 controllers

[Mikko Perttunen]

On Saturday, March 21, 2026 7:49 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 12:40:55AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> > 
> > The PWM controller found on Tegra264 is largely compatible with the one
> > on prior generations, but it comes with some extra features, hence a new
> > compatible string is needed.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> > ---
> > 
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml | 2 ++
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> Where is the driver patch? Why this is not being part of driver
> submission (see also submitting bindings DT in description how patches
> should be sent)?
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Just posted: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-tegra/20260323-t264-pwm-v1-0-4c4ff743050f@nvidia.com/T/#mfb40392e07d7ac9cedbaf853442eed822da7671e

Mikko

Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: pwm: Document Tegra194 and Tegra264 controllers

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 23/03/2026 03:45, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
> On Saturday, March 21, 2026 7:49 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 12:40:55AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>> From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
>>>
>>> The PWM controller found on Tegra264 is largely compatible with the one
>>> on prior generations, but it comes with some extra features, hence a new
>>> compatible string is needed.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml | 2 ++
>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> Where is the driver patch? Why this is not being part of driver
>> submission (see also submitting bindings DT in description how patches
>> should be sent)?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
> 
> Just posted: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-tegra/20260323-t264-pwm-v1-0-4c4ff743050f@nvidia.com/T/#mfb40392e07d7ac9cedbaf853442eed822da7671e

so this is completely misplaced. Please read submitting patches in DT
dir and follow standard style of sending patches upstream. Just like
every other contributor. You don't get any exceptions here.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: pwm: Document Tegra194 and Tegra264 controllers

[Mikko Perttunen]

On Monday, March 23, 2026 4:23 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 23/03/2026 03:45, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
> > On Saturday, March 21, 2026 7:49 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 12:40:55AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> >>> From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> >>> 
> >>> The PWM controller found on Tegra264 is largely compatible with the one
> >>> on prior generations, but it comes with some extra features, hence a new
> >>> compatible string is needed.
> >>> 
> >>> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> >>> ---
> >>> 
> >>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml | 2 ++
> >>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >> 
> >> Where is the driver patch? Why this is not being part of driver
> >> submission (see also submitting bindings DT in description how patches
> >> should be sent)?
> >> 
> >> Best regards,
> >> Krzysztof
> > 
> > Just posted:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-tegra/20260323-t264-pwm-v1-0-4c4ff743050f@n
> > vidia.com/T/#mfb40392e07d7ac9cedbaf853442eed822da7671e
> so this is completely misplaced. Please read submitting patches in DT
> dir and follow standard style of sending patches upstream. Just like
> every other contributor. You don't get any exceptions here.
> 

You asked to see patches, so I thought I'd be helpful and clean up my work in 
progress and respond. I'm not looking for any exceptions. Please do not make 
such accusations.

> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: pwm: Document Tegra194 and Tegra264 controllers

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 24/03/2026 05:24, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
> On Monday, March 23, 2026 4:23 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 23/03/2026 03:45, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
>>> On Saturday, March 21, 2026 7:49 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 12:40:55AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>>>> From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> The PWM controller found on Tegra264 is largely compatible with the one
>>>>> on prior generations, but it comes with some extra features, hence a new
>>>>> compatible string is needed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml | 2 ++
>>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> Where is the driver patch? Why this is not being part of driver
>>>> submission (see also submitting bindings DT in description how patches
>>>> should be sent)?
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Krzysztof
>>>
>>> Just posted:
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-tegra/20260323-t264-pwm-v1-0-4c4ff743050f@n
>>> vidia.com/T/#mfb40392e07d7ac9cedbaf853442eed822da7671e
>> so this is completely misplaced. Please read submitting patches in DT
>> dir and follow standard style of sending patches upstream. Just like
>> every other contributor. You don't get any exceptions here.
>>
> 
> You asked to see patches, so I thought I'd be helpful and clean up my work in 
> progress and respond. I'm not looking for any exceptions. Please do not make 
> such accusations.

I asked where are the patches. The non-existing cover letter of this
patchset explained nothing in this regard. After my question where are
the patches, you sent them without explanation why, so don't assume I
can read your intentions that you posted them just so I can see the
patches and you do not intend to merge them.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: pwm: Document Tegra194 and Tegra264 controllers

[Thierry Reding]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2321 bytes --]

On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 08:02:04AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 24/03/2026 05:24, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
> > On Monday, March 23, 2026 4:23 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On 23/03/2026 03:45, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
> >>> On Saturday, March 21, 2026 7:49 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 12:40:55AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> >>>>> From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The PWM controller found on Tegra264 is largely compatible with the one
> >>>>> on prior generations, but it comes with some extra features, hence a new
> >>>>> compatible string is needed.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml | 2 ++
> >>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >>>>
> >>>> Where is the driver patch? Why this is not being part of driver
> >>>> submission (see also submitting bindings DT in description how patches
> >>>> should be sent)?
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards,
> >>>> Krzysztof
> >>>
> >>> Just posted:
> >>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-tegra/20260323-t264-pwm-v1-0-4c4ff743050f@n
> >>> vidia.com/T/#mfb40392e07d7ac9cedbaf853442eed822da7671e
> >> so this is completely misplaced. Please read submitting patches in DT
> >> dir and follow standard style of sending patches upstream. Just like
> >> every other contributor. You don't get any exceptions here.
> >>
> > 
> > You asked to see patches, so I thought I'd be helpful and clean up my work in 
> > progress and respond. I'm not looking for any exceptions. Please do not make 
> > such accusations.
> 
> I asked where are the patches. The non-existing cover letter of this
> patchset explained nothing in this regard. After my question where are
> the patches, you sent them without explanation why, so don't assume I
> can read your intentions that you posted them just so I can see the
> patches and you do not intend to merge them.

Alright, alright. I'll take the blame for this. I should've coordinated
better with Mikko and made my intentions clearer in the cover letter.
Let's move forward by integrating both series.

Mikko, can you please integrate the DT bindings and DT patches into your
driver series?

Thanks,
Thierry

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: pwm: Document Tegra194 and Tegra264 controllers

[Mikko Perttunen]

On Tuesday, March 24, 2026 5:32 PM Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 08:02:04AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 24/03/2026 05:24, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
> > > On Monday, March 23, 2026 4:23 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > >> On 23/03/2026 03:45, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
> > >>> On Saturday, March 21, 2026 7:49 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > >>>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 12:40:55AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > >>>>> From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> The PWM controller found on Tegra264 is largely compatible with the
> > >>>>> one
> > >>>>> on prior generations, but it comes with some extra features, hence a
> > >>>>> new
> > >>>>> compatible string is needed.
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> > >>>>> ---
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml | 2
> > >>>>>  ++
> > >>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> Where is the driver patch? Why this is not being part of driver
> > >>>> submission (see also submitting bindings DT in description how
> > >>>> patches
> > >>>> should be sent)?
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> Best regards,
> > >>>> Krzysztof
> > >>> 
> > >>> Just posted:
> > >>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-tegra/20260323-t264-pwm-v1-0-4c4ff743050
> > >>> f@n
> > >>> vidia.com/T/#mfb40392e07d7ac9cedbaf853442eed822da7671e
> > >> 
> > >> so this is completely misplaced. Please read submitting patches in DT
> > >> dir and follow standard style of sending patches upstream. Just like
> > >> every other contributor. You don't get any exceptions here.
> > > 
> > > You asked to see patches, so I thought I'd be helpful and clean up my
> > > work in progress and respond. I'm not looking for any exceptions.
> > > Please do not make such accusations.
> > 
> > I asked where are the patches. The non-existing cover letter of this
> > patchset explained nothing in this regard. After my question where are
> > the patches, you sent them without explanation why, so don't assume I
> > can read your intentions that you posted them just so I can see the
> > patches and you do not intend to merge them.
> 
> Alright, alright. I'll take the blame for this. I should've coordinated
> better with Mikko and made my intentions clearer in the cover letter.
> Let's move forward by integrating both series.
> 
> Mikko, can you please integrate the DT bindings and DT patches into your
> driver series?

Will do.

Mikko

> 
> Thanks,
> Thierry

Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: pwm: Document Tegra194 and Tegra264 controllers

[Thierry Reding]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1325 bytes --]

On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 11:49:08AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 12:40:55AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> > 
> > The PWM controller found on Tegra264 is largely compatible with the one
> > on prior generations, but it comes with some extra features, hence a new
> > compatible string is needed.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml | 2 ++
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> Where is the driver patch? Why this is not being part of driver
> submission (see also submitting bindings DT in description how patches
> should be sent)?

I don't see anything in the documentation about a requirement for driver
patches to be included. It does indicate what the ordering of patches
should be if driver code is included, but doesn't specifically say that
driver code must accompany binding updates.

Nor do I understand why it should be needed. I do understand why you
would want to have driver code to go along with a completely new binding
but in cases like this where we're really only adding a new compatible
string to an otherwise unmodified binding, I don't see any advantage in
having to put both together.

Thierry

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: pwm: Document Tegra194 and Tegra264 controllers

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 23/03/2026 15:50, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 11:49:08AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2026 at 12:40:55AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>> From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
>>>
>>> The PWM controller found on Tegra264 is largely compatible with the one
>>> on prior generations, but it comes with some extra features, hence a new
>>> compatible string is needed.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
>>> ---
>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/nvidia,tegra20-pwm.yaml | 2 ++
>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> Where is the driver patch? Why this is not being part of driver
>> submission (see also submitting bindings DT in description how patches
>> should be sent)?
> 
> I don't see anything in the documentation about a requirement for driver
> patches to be included. It does indicate what the ordering of patches
> should be if driver code is included, but doesn't specifically say that

It does. Explicitly:
3) For a series going through multiple trees, the binding patch should
be kept with the driver using the binding.


> driver code must accompany binding updates.

And you have entire cover letter to explain that...

> 
> Nor do I understand why it should be needed. I do understand why you

It's not needed. It is just odd not to have it here.

> would want to have driver code to go along with a completely new binding
> but in cases like this where we're really only adding a new compatible
> string to an otherwise unmodified binding, I don't see any advantage in
> having to put both together.

And the problem appeared later - the driver was posted separately
without the binding. That's a no go and really odd process.

For the other patches you have without drivers, it would be fine. And
you would not get questions if it was explained.


Best regards,
Krzysztof