From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Albrecht =?iso-8859-1?b?RHJl3w==?= Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Generic PWM API implementation Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:51:26 +0100 Message-ID: <1259009486.2170.4@antares> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="=-6J6tOFqakI3t3y4bIlJU" Return-path: In-Reply-To: (from grant.likely@secretlab.ca on Mon Nov 23 18:39:22 2009) Sender: linux-embedded-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org --=-6J6tOFqakI3t3y4bIlJU Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; DelSp=Yes; Format=Flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Am 23.11.09 18:39 schrieb(en) Grant Likely: > There is no overlap here (except for the degenerate case of using a PWM a= s an output only GPIO... which is useful. Board designers do crazy things)= . But there may be cases where a device pin is used as GPIO *and* as pwm outp= ut. Think of a relay output driver which may be used a state GPIO to indic= ate that the device is up, or as a pulsed heartbeat output (some safety sch= emes require that) for the =20 same purpose, selected by a run-time (not device tree!) config option. I actually do exactly this with one of the Freescale 5200's pins, and would= therefore also appreciate a "unified" approach. Cheers, Albrecht. --=-6J6tOFqakI3t3y4bIlJU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBLCvXOn/9unNAn/9ERAhEpAKCHLmjUXjQAxFlNhG6gO0yjWyZecgCfXM6C eCk1hSa1XX0U+VYrjBFezU0= =G+KO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-6J6tOFqakI3t3y4bIlJU--