lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Sep]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [PATCHv2 1/4] pwm: Add Freescale FTM PWM driver support
Date
> Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/4] pwm: Add Freescale FTM PWM driver support
>
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 04:17:09AM +0000, Xiubo Li-B47053 wrote:
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/4] pwm: Add Freescale FTM PWM driver support
> > >
> > > You simply don't need the available field. You don't need to track
> > > whether they are available. If a user enables a pwm which is not
> > > routed out of the SoC (disabled in the iomux) simply nothing will
> > > happen except for a slightly increased power consumption.
> > >
> > If the there is not need to explicitly specify the channels are
> > available or not, so there is no doubt that the 'available' field will
> > be dropt. Why I added this here is because that the 4th and 5th
> > channels' pinctrls are used as UART TX and RX as I have mentioned
> > before, so here if you configure these two pinctrls, the UART TX and
> > RX will be polluted, there maybe some other cases like this.
>
> If you misconfigure your iomux then usually unexptected things happen.
> That is not the problem of the PWM driver, but the problem of the one
> writing the devicetree. The kernel will print a message for conflicting
> iomux settings. That should be hint enough to fix it.
>

That sounds good.
Actully there isn't any conflicting messages will be printed.

I will think it over.


--
Best Regards,
Xiubo



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-09-03 10:01    [W:0.068 / U:0.356 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site