Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1501663

Re: [PATCH] leds: leds-pca963x: workaround group blink scaling issue

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

Show all headers | View raw


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 | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


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