On 04/09/2018 04:21 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 12:38 AM, Mikko Perttunen <cyn...@kapsi.fi> wrote:
Rob,
Please don't top post to lists.
this binding is for a specific IP block (for measuring/aggregating input
pulses) on the Tegra186 SoC, so I don't think it fits in
Rob,
this binding is for a specific IP block (for measuring/aggregating input
pulses) on the Tegra186 SoC, so I don't think it fits into any generic
binding.
Thanks,
Mikko
On 03/27/2018 05:52 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 10:10:38AM +0530, Rajkumar Rampelli wrote:
Supply
On 07.03.2018 16:20, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 03/07/2018 01:47 AM, Rajkumar Rampelli wrote:
On Wednesday 28 February 2018 07:59 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 02/27/2018 11:03 PM, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
On 02/28/2018 08:12 AM, Rajkumar Rampelli wrote:
On Wednesday 28 February 2018 11:28 AM
On 02/28/2018 08:12 AM, Rajkumar Rampelli wrote:
On Wednesday 28 February 2018 11:28 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 02/27/2018 09:38 PM, Rajkumar Rampelli wrote:
On Wednesday 21 February 2018 08:20 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 02/20/2018 10:58 PM, Rajkumar Rampelli wrote:
Add generic PWM based
On 21.02.2018 16:46, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 02/20/2018 11:15 PM, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
AIUI, the PWM framework already exposes a sysfs node with period
information. We should just use that instead of adding a new driver
for this.
I am kind of lost. Please explain.
Are you saying that we
AIUI, the PWM framework already exposes a sysfs node with period
information. We should just use that instead of adding a new driver for
this.
In any case, we cannot add something like this to device tree since it's
not a hardware device.
Mikko
On 21.02.2018 08:58, Rajkumar Rampelli wrote:
