From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
To: Brian Masney <masneyb@onstation.org>
Cc: dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, robh+dt@kernel.org,
mark.rutland@arm.com, agross@kernel.org,
bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, mturquette@baylibre.com,
linux-input@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-clk@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] dt-bindings: Input: introduce new clock vibrator bindings
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2020 09:52:21 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200107175222.6B5052073D@mail.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200107120317.GB8083@onstation.org>
Quoting Brian Masney (2020-01-07 04:03:17)
> On Sun, Jan 05, 2020 at 12:35:33AM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting Brian Masney (2019-12-04 16:25:00)
> > > +examples:
> > > + - |
> > > + #include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,mmcc-msm8974.h>
> > > + #include <dt-bindings/gpio/gpio.h>
> > > +
> > > + vibrator {
> > > + compatible = "clk-vibrator";
> > > +
> > > + vcc-supply = <&pm8941_l19>;
> > > +
> > > + clocks = <&mmcc CAMSS_GP1_CLK>;
> > > + clock-names = "core";
> > > + clock-frequency = <24000>;
> > > +
> > > + enable-gpios = <&msmgpio 60 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
> > > +
> > > + pinctrl-names = "default";
> > > + pinctrl-0 = <&vibrator_pin>;
> >
> > I'm still trying to wrap my head around this. I think we can have a pwm
> > provider in a clk controller node (so imagine &mmcc has #pwm-cells) and
> > then this 'clk-vibrator' binding wouldn't exist? Instead we would have
> > some sort of binding for a device that expects a pwm and whatever else
> > is required, like the enable gpio and power supply. Is there an actual
> > hardware block that is this way? Does it have a real product id and is
> > made by some company? Right now this looks a little too generic to not
> > just be a catch-all for something that buzzes.
>
> So have some of the Qualcomm clocks like this one register with both the
> clk and the pwm frameworks? I feel that approach would better represent
> the hardware in device tree.
That is one option. Or another option would be to have another node that
"adapts" a clk signal to a pwm provider. Similar to how we adapt a gpio
to make a clk gate or mux. Something like:
gcc: clock-controller@f00d {
reg = <0xf00d 0xd00d>;
#clock-cells = <1>;
};
pwm {
compatible = "pwm-clk";
#pwm-cells = <0>;
clocks = <&gcc 45>;
assigned-clocks = <&gcc 45>;
assigned-clock-rates = <1400000>;
};
And then the pwm-clk driver would adjust the duty cycle to generate a
pwm.
>
> If we did that, then the pwm-vibra driver in the input subsystem could
> be used.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-07 17:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-05 0:24 [PATCH 0/7] qcom: add clk-vibrator driver Brian Masney
2019-12-05 0:24 ` [PATCH 1/7] clk: qcom: add support for setting the duty cycle Brian Masney
2019-12-10 4:47 ` Taniya Das
2020-02-12 23:23 ` Stephen Boyd
[not found] ` <0101016eee224b50-8a5545e2-837f-41c2-9574-b385e111a6b3-000000@us-west-2.amazonses.com>
2019-12-10 11:51 ` Brian Masney
2019-12-13 13:56 ` Linus Walleij
2019-12-05 0:24 ` [PATCH 2/7] dt-bindings: Input: drop msm-vibrator in favor of clk-vibrator Brian Masney
2019-12-17 14:11 ` Rob Herring
2019-12-05 0:24 ` [PATCH 3/7] Input: drop msm-vibrator in favor of clk-vibrator driver Brian Masney
2020-02-11 12:18 ` Brian Masney
2019-12-05 0:25 ` [PATCH 4/7] dt-bindings: Input: introduce new clock vibrator bindings Brian Masney
2019-12-05 13:56 ` Rob Herring
2019-12-09 0:54 ` Brian Masney
2019-12-09 16:16 ` Rob Herring
2019-12-09 16:55 ` Brian Masney
2020-01-05 8:35 ` Stephen Boyd
2020-01-07 12:03 ` Brian Masney
2020-01-07 17:52 ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2020-01-07 23:18 ` Brian Masney
2019-12-05 0:25 ` [PATCH 5/7] Input: introduce new clock vibrator driver Brian Masney
2019-12-05 0:25 ` [PATCH 6/7] ARM: qcom_defconfig: drop msm-vibrator in favor of clk-vibrator driver Brian Masney
2019-12-05 0:25 ` [PATCH 7/7] ARM: dts: qcom: msm8974-hammerhead: add support for vibrator Brian Masney
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=20200107175222.6B5052073D@mail.kernel.org \
--to=sboyd@kernel.org \
--cc=agross@kernel.org \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=masneyb@onstation.org \
--cc=mturquette@baylibre.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).