| Message ID | 1492608293-12435-6-git-send-email-ulrich.hecht+renesas@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Delegated to: | Simon Horman |
| Headers | show |
Hi Uli, On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Ulrich Hecht <ulrich.hecht+renesas@gmail.com> wrote: > From: Takeshi Kihara <takeshi.kihara.df@renesas.com> > > This patch enables PWM{1,2} for Salvator-X board on R8A7795 SoC. > > Signed-off-by: Takeshi Kihara <takeshi.kihara.df@renesas.com> > Signed-off-by: Ulrich Hecht <ulrich.hecht+renesas@gmail.com> > --- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a7795-salvator-x.dts | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a7795-salvator-x.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a7795-salvator-x.dts > index bf4674e..842b0dd 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a7795-salvator-x.dts > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a7795-salvator-x.dts > @@ -282,6 +282,18 @@ > }; > }; > > +&pwm1 { > + pinctrl-0 = <&pwm1_pins>; > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > + status = "okay"; > +}; > + > +&pwm2 { > + pinctrl-0 = <&pwm2_pins>; > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > + status = "okay"; > +}; > + > &du { > pinctrl-0 = <&du_pins>; > pinctrl-names = "default"; > @@ -324,6 +336,16 @@ > pinctrl-0 = <&scif_clk_pins>; > pinctrl-names = "default"; > > + pwm1_pins: pwm1 { > + groups = "pwm1_a", "pwm1_b"; Enabling both the A and B alternative pins? > + function = "pwm1"; > + }; > + > + pwm2_pins: pwm2 { > + groups = "pwm2_a", "pwm2_b"; Enabling both the A and B alternative pins? > + function = "pwm2"; > + }; > + Oh, I wrote that before: http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-renesas-soc/msg00026.html And we already have a correct v3 from you in patchwork: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8711801/ And Laurent enabled backlight independently: https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2016-November/124385.html Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > And we already have a correct v3 from you in patchwork: > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8711801/ Whoops... In my defense, that was over a year ago. Simon, any reason this didn't make it in? CU Uli
Hi Ulrich > > And we already have a correct v3 from you in patchwork: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8711801/ > > Whoops... > > In my defense, that was over a year ago. Simon, any reason this didn't > make it in? If I were you, I track posted my patch, and re-send it after 2weeks if nothing happen ;P Best regards --- Kuninori Morimoto
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 9:35 AM, Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> wrote: > > Hi Ulrich > >> > And we already have a correct v3 from you in patchwork: >> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8711801/ >> >> Whoops... >> >> In my defense, that was over a year ago. Simon, any reason this didn't >> make it in? > > If I were you, I track posted my patch, and re-send it > after 2weeks if nothing happen ;P Yes, mom... (And to whoever might consider telling me that I should clean up my office so I don't lose track of my equipment: I will make sure my next patch will accidentally electrocute you. At compile time.) CU Uli
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 09:26:04AM +0200, Ulrich Hecht wrote: > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven > <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > And we already have a correct v3 from you in patchwork: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8711801/ > > Whoops... > > In my defense, that was over a year ago. Simon, any reason this didn't > make it in? Given it was over a year ago I hope you can understand that I don't recall why this wasn't accepted. It is entirely possible that it was an oversight on my part in which case I apologise - I am not a machine and I make mistakes. I see that patches 3/5 and 4/5 also need updating. Could you repost them along with this patch with the review comments addressed? I will try not to let them slip through the cracks again.
Hi Simon, On Monday 24 Apr 2017 09:49:01 Simon Horman wrote: > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 09:26:04AM +0200, Ulrich Hecht wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > And we already have a correct v3 from you in patchwork: > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8711801/ > > > > Whoops... > > > > In my defense, that was over a year ago. Simon, any reason this didn't > > make it in? > > Given it was over a year ago I hope you can understand that I don't recall > why this wasn't accepted. It is entirely possible that it was an oversight > on my part in which case I apologise - I am not a machine and I make > mistakes. > > I see that patches 3/5 and 4/5 also need updating. > Could you repost them along with this patch with the review comments > addressed? I will try not to let them slip through the cracks again. How about using pwm1 for backlight as done in "[PATCH v2 09/13] arm64: dts: r8a7795: salvator-x: Add panel backlight support" ?
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au> wrote: > Given it was over a year ago I hope you can understand that I don't recall > why this wasn't accepted. I didn't remember having sent it myself, so, yes, I do understand. :) I just thought there might be something obvious about it that I'm missing. > I see that patches 3/5 and 4/5 also need updating. > Could you repost them along with this patch with the review comments > addressed? I will try not to let them slip through the cracks again. Will do, thank you. CU Uli
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:59 AM, Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> wrote: > How about using pwm1 for backlight as done in "[PATCH v2 09/13] arm64: dts: > r8a7795: salvator-x: Add panel backlight support" ? Makes sense. Simon, should that go in a separate patch, or should I add it to this one? CU Uli
Hi Ulrich, On Monday 24 Apr 2017 10:22:31 Ulrich Hecht wrote: > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:59 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > How about using pwm1 for backlight as done in "[PATCH v2 09/13] arm64: > > dts: r8a7795: salvator-x: Add panel backlight support" ? > > Makes sense. Simon, should that go in a separate patch, or should I > add it to this one? How about applying "[PATCH v2 09/13] arm64: dts: r8a7795: salvator-x: Add panel backlight support" and rebasing this patch to only handle pwm2 ?
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> wrote: > Hi Ulrich, > > On Monday 24 Apr 2017 10:22:31 Ulrich Hecht wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:59 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >> > How about using pwm1 for backlight as done in "[PATCH v2 09/13] arm64: >> > dts: r8a7795: salvator-x: Add panel backlight support" ? >> >> Makes sense. Simon, should that go in a separate patch, or should I >> add it to this one? > > How about applying "[PATCH v2 09/13] arm64: dts: r8a7795: salvator-x: Add > panel backlight support" and rebasing this patch to only handle pwm2 ? I'll do that then. CU Uli
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 12:02:17PM +0200, Ulrich Hecht wrote: > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Laurent Pinchart > <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> wrote: > > Hi Ulrich, > > > > On Monday 24 Apr 2017 10:22:31 Ulrich Hecht wrote: > >> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:59 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >> > How about using pwm1 for backlight as done in "[PATCH v2 09/13] arm64: > >> > dts: r8a7795: salvator-x: Add panel backlight support" ? > >> > >> Makes sense. Simon, should that go in a separate patch, or should I > >> add it to this one? > > > > How about applying "[PATCH v2 09/13] arm64: dts: r8a7795: salvator-x: Add > > panel backlight support" and rebasing this patch to only handle pwm2 ? > > I'll do that then. Do you need any more input from me at this time?
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 9:50 AM, Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 12:02:17PM +0200, Ulrich Hecht wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Laurent Pinchart >> <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> wrote: >> > Hi Ulrich, >> > >> > On Monday 24 Apr 2017 10:22:31 Ulrich Hecht wrote: >> >> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:59 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >> >> > How about using pwm1 for backlight as done in "[PATCH v2 09/13] arm64: >> >> > dts: r8a7795: salvator-x: Add panel backlight support" ? >> >> >> >> Makes sense. Simon, should that go in a separate patch, or should I >> >> add it to this one? >> > >> > How about applying "[PATCH v2 09/13] arm64: dts: r8a7795: salvator-x: Add >> > panel backlight support" and rebasing this patch to only handle pwm2 ? >> >> I'll do that then. > > Do you need any more input from me at this time? No, I'm fine, thanks. CU Uli
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a7795-salvator-x.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a7795-salvator-x.dts index bf4674e..842b0dd 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a7795-salvator-x.dts +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a7795-salvator-x.dts @@ -282,6 +282,18 @@ }; }; +&pwm1 { + pinctrl-0 = <&pwm1_pins>; + pinctrl-names = "default"; + status = "okay"; +}; + +&pwm2 { + pinctrl-0 = <&pwm2_pins>; + pinctrl-names = "default"; + status = "okay"; +}; + &du { pinctrl-0 = <&du_pins>; pinctrl-names = "default"; @@ -324,6 +336,16 @@ pinctrl-0 = <&scif_clk_pins>; pinctrl-names = "default"; + pwm1_pins: pwm1 { + groups = "pwm1_a", "pwm1_b"; + function = "pwm1"; + }; + + pwm2_pins: pwm2 { + groups = "pwm2_a", "pwm2_b"; + function = "pwm2"; + }; + scif1_pins: scif1 { groups = "scif1_data_a", "scif1_ctrl"; function = "scif1";