Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1501663
| From | Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@samsung.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] leds: leds-pca963x: workaround group blink scaling issue |
| Date | 2016-10-17 10:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <staZY-A3-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <srP1v-4Cs-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <srPbb-4G0-23@gated-at.bofh.it> <ss4jT-6bx-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <ssbEK-2pQ-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <ssvWN-7rU-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 10/15/2016 02:00 PM, Matt Ranostay wrote: > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 7:20 AM, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote: >> * Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@samsung.com> [161013 23:37]: >>> On 10/13/2016 04:20 PM, Matt Ranostay wrote: >>>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 4:05 PM, Jacek Anaszewski >>>> <j.anaszewski@samsung.com> wrote: >>>>> Why DT property? Is it somehow dependent on the board configuration? >>>>> How this period-scale value is calculated? Is it inferred empirically? >>>>> >>>> >>>> We empirically discovered and verified this with an logic analyzer on >>>> multiple batches of this part. >>>> Reason for the DT entry is we aren't 100% sure that it is always going >>>> to be the same with different board revs. >>>> >>>> Could be that parts clock acts differently with supply voltage. This >>>> has been calculated by setting it an expected value, and measuring the >>>> actual result with the logic analyzer. >>> >>> I'd like to have DT maintainer's ack for this. >>> >>> Cc Rob and Mark. >> >> How about do this based on the compatible property instead? If there >> are multiple manufacturers for this part and only a certain >> parts have this issue we should have multiple compatible properties. >> > > I could only find that NXP as the manufacturer of that part. It is > possible since the clock is internal to the chipset that the vdd of > 2.5V is doing something undefined. > >> Then if it turns out all of them need this scaling there's no need >> to update the binding. > > Understandable. Since at present we can't guarantee that all produced devices are affected, then we should strive to avoid breaking any existing users of the possible non-affected devices. In view of that the addition of a new "compatible" proposed by Tony seems most reasonable. Still, DT maintainer's opinion is required. -- Best regards, Jacek Anaszewski
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH] leds: leds-pca963x: workaround group blink scaling issue Matt Ranostay <mranostay@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 15:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH] leds: leds-pca963x: workaround group blink scaling issue Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@samsung.com> - 2016-10-13 16:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH] leds: leds-pca963x: workaround group blink scaling issue Matt Ranostay <mranostay@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 16:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH] leds: leds-pca963x: workaround group blink scaling issue Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@samsung.com> - 2016-10-14 08:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH] leds: leds-pca963x: workaround group blink scaling issue Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> - 2016-10-14 16:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH] leds: leds-pca963x: workaround group blink scaling issue Matt Ranostay <mranostay@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 14:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH] leds: leds-pca963x: workaround group blink scaling issue Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@samsung.com> - 2016-10-17 10:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH] leds: leds-pca963x: workaround group blink scaling issue Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> - 2016-10-18 15:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH] leds: leds-pca963x: workaround group blink scaling issue Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@samsung.com> - 2016-10-18 16:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH] leds: leds-pca963x: workaround group blink scaling issue Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@samsung.com> - 2016-10-25 09:20 +0200
csiph-web