From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jonathan Cameron Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Generic PWM Device API Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:28:46 +0000 Message-ID: <4D6B86EE.1050908@cam.ac.uk> References: <20110228103124.GI29521@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110228103124.GI29521@pengutronix.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Sascha Hauer Cc: Bill Gatliff , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org On 02/28/11 10:31, Sascha Hauer wrote: > On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 09:38:38PM -0600, Bill Gatliff wrote: >> Andrew, Linus: >> >> >> The git repository described in the following pull request implements >> a generic PWM device driver API. This API is intended to eventually >> supercede the existing PWM device drivers, but during a migration >> period will coexist peacefully with them. > > Sorry for the late answer, but it took some time to read the patches > again. > > Is it a good idea to have to APIs for the same thing in the kernel? > The old API has users whereas the new API has none. How can we migrate > from one API to the other when for example the backlight pwm driver > depends on the old API, SoC level drivers implement the old API, but > the atmel pwm driver is only available for the new API? > See the info in Bill's previous postings. He has other drivers queued up but wants to break up the review burden by merging this core stuff first...