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

Groups > linux.kernel > #1695034 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCHv4 1/3] dt-bindings: input: add pwm-vibrator

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCHv4 1/3] dt-bindings: input: add pwm-vibrator Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> - 2017-07-24 21:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCHv4 1/3] dt-bindings: input: add pwm-vibrator Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@collabora.co.uk> - 2017-07-25 11:10 +0200

#1695034 — Re: [PATCHv4 1/3] dt-bindings: input: add pwm-vibrator

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri 2017-07-14 12:01:49, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> Add DT binding document for PWM controlled vibrator devices.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@collabora.co.uk>

Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>

> index 000000000000..09145d18491d
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/pwm-vibrator.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,66 @@
> +* PWM vibrator device tree bindings
> +
> +Registers a PWM device as vibrator. It is expected, that the vibrator's
> +strength increases based on the duty cycle of the enable PWM channel
> +(100% duty cycle meaning strongest vibration, 0% meaning no vibration).
> +
> +The binding supports an optional direction PWM channel, that can be
> +driven at fixed duty cycle. If available this is can be used to increase
> +the vibration effect of some devices.

Actually what "direction" does would be nice to explain, because I
don't know. Does it make the motor turn the other way around?

> +Required properties:
> +- compatible: should contain "pwm-vibrator"

should->Should.

> +- pwm-names: Should contain "enable" and optionally "direction"
> +- pwms: Should contain a PWM handle for each entry in pwm-names
> +
> +Optional properties:
> +- vcc-supply: Phandle for the regulator supplying power
> +- direction-duty-cycle-ns: Duty cycle of the direction PWM channel in
> +                           nanoseconds, defaults to 50% of the channel's
> +			   period.

Is nanoseconds right unit here? It drives a motor...

Thanks,
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1695520

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi,

On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 09:20:17PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Fri 2017-07-14 12:01:49, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> > Add DT binding document for PWM controlled vibrator devices.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@collabora.co.uk>
> 
> Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
> 
> > index 000000000000..09145d18491d
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/pwm-vibrator.txt
> > @@ -0,0 +1,66 @@
> > +* PWM vibrator device tree bindings
> > +
> > +Registers a PWM device as vibrator. It is expected, that the vibrator's
> > +strength increases based on the duty cycle of the enable PWM channel
> > +(100% duty cycle meaning strongest vibration, 0% meaning no vibration).
> > +
> > +The binding supports an optional direction PWM channel, that can be
> > +driven at fixed duty cycle. If available this is can be used to increase
> > +the vibration effect of some devices.
> 
> Actually what "direction" does would be nice to explain, because I
> don't know. Does it make the motor turn the other way around?

Yes, at least that's how I understand it. IIUIC this will increase
the imbalance effect and thus the vibration.

> > +Required properties:
> > +- compatible: should contain "pwm-vibrator"
> 
> should->Should.
>
> > +- pwm-names: Should contain "enable" and optionally "direction"
> > +- pwms: Should contain a PWM handle for each entry in pwm-names
> > +
> > +Optional properties:
> > +- vcc-supply: Phandle for the regulator supplying power
> > +- direction-duty-cycle-ns: Duty cycle of the direction PWM channel in
> > +                           nanoseconds, defaults to 50% of the channel's
> > +			   period.
> 
> Is nanoseconds right unit here? It drives a motor...

Yes, for the driving the motor the values will be very big
and we could use milliseconds. But the PWM specifier [0] uses
nanoseconds for the period and I think period and duty cycle
should be described in the same scale.

[0] Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm.txt

-- Sebastian

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web