From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@avionic-design.de>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
Ryan Mallon <rmallon@gmail.com>,
Bill Gatliff <bgat@billgatliff.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
viresh kumar <viresh.kumar@st.com>,
Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org>,
Ryan Mallon <ryan@bluewatersys.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] PWM: add pwm framework support
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 09:53:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111207085339.GA7970@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201107041607.10265.arnd@arndb.de>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1962 bytes --]
* Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Monday 04 July 2011, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 08:43:23PM +1000, Ryan Mallon wrote:
> >
> > > The fine-grained control api could be added now. pwm_config could be
> > > left as is for the time being (the new api could be a wrapper around it
> > > to start with). Polarity control and interrupt handling apis could also
> > > be defined without affecting the drivers which don't need to implement
> > > them. Multiple channels and the sleeping/non-sleeping api are the more
> > > difficult ones, but at least having some sort of indication about how
> > > these plan to be solved would be useful.
> >
> > Again, why should we add these *now*? It only raises the chance that
> > there's more discussion.
>
> My impression is that there are a lot of things that could easily be
> done to improve the state of PWM drivers, but I don't care about the
> order in which they are done. My main issue is the lack of a subsystem
> core driver, which both you and Bill have patches for. It's clear that
> other people have other issues and want to see their problems addressed
> first.
>
> I also think that the pwm code is simple enough that we don't have
> to worry too much about the order that things are done in. Any patch
> that is making the code better should just get in and not have to
> wait for something else to be completed first.
>
> What we do need now is a maintainer that can coordinate the patches
> and merge the ones that have been agreed on. Or multiple maintainers.
Hi,
I'm looking at adding DT support for pwm-backlight, and I think a central PWM
API will be required first. Looking through the archives this seems to be the
last activity in that direction. Perhaps we can get the efforts restarted?
I pretty much agree with Arnd and Sascha here in that we should try to get a
basic framework added. Everything else can be added on top later.
Thierry
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-07 8:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-30 10:41 [PATCH v3] implement a generic PWM framework Sascha Hauer
2011-06-30 10:41 ` [PATCH 1/3] PWM: add pwm framework support Sascha Hauer
2011-06-30 11:07 ` Bill Gatliff
2011-06-30 12:41 ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-06-30 16:17 ` Bill Gatliff
2011-06-30 17:02 ` Sascha Hauer
2011-06-30 19:45 ` Bill Gatliff
2011-06-30 23:24 ` Ryan Mallon
2011-07-01 0:33 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2011-07-01 0:55 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-07-01 7:37 ` Sascha Hauer
2011-07-01 8:28 ` Ryan Mallon
2011-07-01 8:54 ` Sascha Hauer
2011-07-02 0:40 ` Ryan Mallon
2011-07-04 7:55 ` Sascha Hauer
2011-07-04 10:43 ` Ryan Mallon
2011-07-04 11:05 ` Kurt Van Dijck
2011-07-04 13:53 ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-07-04 14:19 ` Kurt Van Dijck
2011-07-04 12:43 ` Sascha Hauer
2011-07-04 14:07 ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-12-07 8:53 ` Thierry Reding [this message]
2011-12-07 9:07 ` Sascha Hauer
2011-12-14 10:03 ` Thierry Reding
2011-12-14 11:37 ` Sascha Hauer
2011-07-01 9:49 ` Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
2011-06-30 10:41 ` [PATCH 2/3] ARM mxs: adjust pwm resources to what the driver expects Sascha Hauer
2011-06-30 11:30 ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-06-30 10:41 ` [PATCH 3/3] pwm: Add a i.MX23/28 pwm driver Sascha Hauer
2011-06-30 11:42 ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-06-30 15:11 ` Sascha Hauer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20111207085339.GA7970@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de \
--to=thierry.reding@avionic-design.de \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bgat@billgatliff.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rmallon@gmail.com \
--cc=ryan@bluewatersys.com \
--cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
--cc=shawn.guo@linaro.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@st.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox