From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp15.bhosted.nl (smtp15.bhosted.nl [94.124.121.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B9EE1C2324 for ; Fri, 28 Feb 2025 09:22:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=94.124.121.26 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740734527; cv=none; b=sMVNPv2qjbrVrN1UrFsAJFZBsmAcpdyBUN52eKuaae0oDxZgaVECO9/3GSAQbIDm7XvvQnTwevOwNWMZ3xJqIkGZG1Ri/t8kbhVKc3kUJMCIyIT8FsubSclzcCogezsDKIUgsztiuNdVXgeV9G3weXNen+ELlLSC1RuAjc4Mdgg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740734527; c=relaxed/simple; bh=9h4g6Xq7+qt9vrg/isJrzGdIn31jXKxf7V2H9WCRPMY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ASyj5QFzwcbM4WqZ9hmHUFcrdHGa+/Qi3uVSbBg4omS91SK7uZHWEWQcMbo+8TyMF5LLKajqOtr8fARYhYvhYaxbaSn9ErqCGwfaLIkx7/afaRoolWCUBwU6ZfVmV+MYNKCT/VAy1zO5uyAAHUUtKIUbcjwV9No5yyeNV4FeXZ8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=protonic.nl; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=protonic.nl; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonic.nl header.i=@protonic.nl header.b=BB53on2S; arc=none smtp.client-ip=94.124.121.26 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=protonic.nl Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=protonic.nl Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonic.nl header.i=@protonic.nl header.b="BB53on2S" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonic.nl; s=202111; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type:mime-version:references:in-reply-to: message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from; bh=WBBTkblEXBxFsJYPymXDFJAe/vnTFzbtnD/Nx9Tb6DY=; b=BB53on2SKjQ6lG8RncsKGcVUMiRWDwUMORrFQSRaB6f4E7+Yr5nvFrgn4QFlwANrO/R8gmTzPDu4Q r7jbsdhNvocmYu6nET+d3a7xgifWVXpT4rq44nm5gYXuipymgo1ttyVUlwH418ywCcVed0rFxACq2D VWPsW2myVCJLismtgz83aTo+MXgod3YTEE4hpDtgNr2DDhyu2Enf6A2DWQdB+caXIaYnJ+r0zhsscX 9gQKxjSCJXC+4qUKgl2bQ4wiZniQKIWQdpDg9xZTuC81vxVh70oSp3aN2i5+ibUkyFWzXfeXvoY4ag 9ZcVM/tQyFo6xHo5PH6KHDld1Y04KuA== X-MSG-ID: 77ece18d-f5b5-11ef-a39b-00505681446f Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 10:22:01 +0100 From: David Jander To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Nuno Sa , Jonathan Cameron , Oleksij Rempel Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 7/7] dt-bindings: motion: Add motion-simple-pwm bindings Message-ID: <20250228102201.590b4be6@erd003.prtnl> In-Reply-To: <20250228-wonderful-python-of-resistance-d5b662@krzk-bin> References: <20250227162823.3585810-1-david@protonic.nl> <20250227162823.3585810-8-david@protonic.nl> <20250228-wonderful-python-of-resistance-d5b662@krzk-bin> Organization: Protonic Holland X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.0 (GTK 3.24.48; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear Krzysztof, Thanks for reviewing... On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 08:12:45 +0100 Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 05:28:23PM +0100, David Jander wrote: > [...] > > +description: | > > Do not need '|' unless you need to preserve formatting. > > > + Simple motor control device based on 1 or 2 PWM outputs > > Your schema does not allow 1. Test it. Ok, that came as a surprise to me. Thanks! > > + > > +properties: > > + compatible: > > + enum: > > + - motion-simple-pwm > > + > > + pwms: > > + maxItems: 2 > > List and describe items instead. > > > + > > + pwm-names: > > + maxItems: 2 > > List items instead. Will do in next iteration. Thanks. > > + > > + motion,pwm-inverted: > > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/flag > > And PWM flag does not work? I have seen PWM controllers that don't seem to support the PWM_POLARITY_INVERTED flag and those where it just doesn't work. Should all PWM controller drivers always support the PWM_POLARITY_INVERTED flag, even if it needs to be inverted in software? If so, there are some drivers that need fixing. > Anyway, there is no "motion" company. Got it. Dropped all the "motion," prefixes. > > + description: > > + If present, this flag indicates that the PWM signal should be inverted. > > + The duty-cycle will be scaled from 100% down to 0% instead 0% to 100%. > > + > > +required: > > + - compatible > > + - pwms > > + > > +allOf: > > + - $ref: /schemas/motion/common.yaml# > > + > > +unevaluatedProperties: false > > + > > +examples: > > + - | > > + // This example shows how to use the TI DRV8873 or similar motor controllers > > + // with this driver > > + motion-simple-pwm0 { > > Node names should be generic. See also an explanation and list of > examples (not exhaustive) in DT specification: > https://devicetree-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/chapter2-devicetree-basics.html#generic-names-recommendation > > e.g. motor { Will change. Thanks. Best regards, -- David Jander