Re: [PATCH V6 2/5] pwm: Add i.MX TPM PWM driver support
From: Uwe Kleine-König
Date: Tue Mar 19 2019 - 04:04:38 EST
On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 06:50:12AM +0000, Anson Huang wrote:
> i.MX7ULP has TPM(Low Power Timer/Pulse Width Modulation Module)
> inside, it can support multiple PWM channels, all the channels
> share same counter and period setting, but each channel can
> configure its duty and polarity independently.
>
> There are several TPM modules in i.MX7ULP, the number of channels
> in TPM modules are different, it can be read from each TPM module's
> PARAM register.
>
> Signed-off-by: Anson Huang <Anson.Huang@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> Changes since V5:
> - improve commit message body;
> - add period round function;
> - use per channel data for saving channel's private data;
> - improve error message output during probe;
> - improve different period settings by different channels' handling;
> - support #pwm-cells 3 cases.
> ---
> drivers/pwm/Kconfig | 11 ++
> drivers/pwm/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/pwm/pwm-imx-tpm.c | 463 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 475 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 drivers/pwm/pwm-imx-tpm.c
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> index 54f8238..3ea0391 100644
> --- a/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/Kconfig
> @@ -210,6 +210,17 @@ config PWM_IMX27
> To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module
> will be called pwm-imx27.
>
> +config PWM_IMX_TPM
> + tristate "i.MX TPM PWM support"
> + depends on ARCH_MXC || COMPILE_TEST
> + depends on HAVE_CLK && HAS_IOMEM
> + help
> + Generic PWM framework driver for i.MX7ULP TPM module, TPM's full
> + name is Low Power Timer/Pulse Width Modulation Module.
> +
> + To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module
> + will be called pwm-imx-tpm.
> +
> config PWM_JZ4740
> tristate "Ingenic JZ47xx PWM support"
> depends on MACH_INGENIC
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/Makefile b/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> index 448825e..c368599 100644
> --- a/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/Makefile
> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_HIBVT) += pwm-hibvt.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_IMG) += pwm-img.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_IMX1) += pwm-imx1.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_IMX27) += pwm-imx27.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_IMX_TPM) += pwm-imx-tpm.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_JZ4740) += pwm-jz4740.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_LP3943) += pwm-lp3943.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PWM_LPC18XX_SCT) += pwm-lpc18xx-sct.o
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx-tpm.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx-tpm.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..bb6b27e
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx-tpm.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,463 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/*
> + * Copyright 2018-2019 NXP.
> + *
> + * Limitations:
> + * - The TPM counter and period counter are shared between
> + * multiple channels, so all channels should use same period
> + * settings.
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/bitfield.h>
> +#include <linux/bitops.h>
> +#include <linux/clk.h>
> +#include <linux/err.h>
> +#include <linux/io.h>
> +#include <linux/log2.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/of.h>
> +#include <linux/of_address.h>
> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +#include <linux/pwm.h>
> +#include <linux/slab.h>
> +
> +#define PWM_IMX_TPM_PARAM 0x4
> +#define PWM_IMX_TPM_GLOBAL 0x8
> +#define PWM_IMX_TPM_SC 0x10
> +#define PWM_IMX_TPM_CNT 0x14
> +#define PWM_IMX_TPM_MOD 0x18
> +#define PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC(n) (0x20 + (n) * 0x8)
> +#define PWM_IMX_TPM_CnV(n) (0x24 + (n) * 0x8)
> +
> +#define PWM_IMX_TPM_PARAM_CHAN GENMASK(7, 0)
> +
> +#define PWM_IMX_TPM_SC_PS GENMASK(2, 0)
> +#define PWM_IMX_TPM_SC_CMOD GENMASK(4, 3)
> +#define PWM_IMX_TPM_SC_CMOD_INC_EVERY_CLK BIT(3)
> +#define PWM_IMX_TPM_SC_CPWMS BIT(5)
> +
> +#define PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC_CHF BIT(7)
> +#define PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC_MSB BIT(5)
> +#define PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC_MSA BIT(4)
> +#define PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC_ELS GENMASK(3, 2) /* combine ELSA and ELSB as a field */
I'd write a more verbose comment here to make this understandable.
Something like:
/*
* The reference manual describes this field as two separate bits. The
* samantic of the two bits isn't orthogonal though, so they are treated
* together as a 2-bit field here.
*/
> +
> +#define PWM_IMX_TPM_MOD_MOD GENMASK(15, 0)
> +
> +#define PWM_IMX_TPM_MAX_COUNT 0xffff
This is just the maximal value for PWM_IMX_TPM_MOD_MOD? If so, this
should be reflected in the name. Other than that, PWM_IMX_TPM_MOD_MOD
could be used for that, too.
> +struct imx_tpm_pwm_chip {
> + struct pwm_chip chip;
> + struct clk *clk;
> + void __iomem *base;
> + struct mutex lock;
> + u32 user_count;
> + u32 enable_count;
> + u32 real_period;
> +};
> +
> +struct imx_tpm_pwm_channel {
> + u32 config;
> + bool status;
> +};
> +
> +static inline struct imx_tpm_pwm_chip *to_imx_tpm_pwm_chip(struct pwm_chip *chip)
> +{
> + return container_of(chip, struct imx_tpm_pwm_chip, chip);
> +}
> +
> +static unsigned int pwm_imx_tpm_round_period(struct pwm_chip *chip,
> + u32 period)
> +{
> + struct imx_tpm_pwm_chip *tpm = to_imx_tpm_pwm_chip(chip);
> + u32 rate, real_period, prescale, period_count;
> + u64 tmp;
> +
> + rate = clk_get_rate(tpm->clk);
> + tmp = period;
> + tmp *= rate;
> + tmp = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(tmp, NSEC_PER_SEC);
The value tmp holds is the time a single counter step takes, right?
Please give that a better name. Something like clock_unit.
> + if (tmp <= PWM_IMX_TPM_MAX_COUNT) {
> + prescale = 0;
> + } else {
> + prescale = roundup_pow_of_two(tmp /
> + (PWM_IMX_TPM_MAX_COUNT + 1));
Do divide a u64 you must not use a plain division. You need div64_ul()
here.
> + prescale = ilog2(prescale);
This is equivalent to:
prescale = roundup_pow_of_two(tmp);
prescale = ilog2(prescale) - 16;
which safes a division. (Of course don't use a plain 16 in your code.)
> + }
> +
> + /* if no valid prescale found, use MAX instead */
> + if ((!FIELD_FIT(PWM_IMX_TPM_SC_PS, prescale)))
> + prescale = PWM_IMX_TPM_SC_PS >> __bf_shf(PWM_IMX_TPM_SC_PS);
prescale = FIELD_PREP(PWM_IMX_TPM_SC_PS, PWM_IMX_TPM_SC_PS)
What is the consequence if the calculated prescale isn't valid? I assume
this yields a greatly different period? If yes, this should result in an
error.
> + /* if no valid period count found, use MAX instead */
> + period_count = (tmp + ((1 << prescale) >> 1)) >> prescale;
> + if (period_count > PWM_IMX_TPM_MOD_MOD)
> + period_count = PWM_IMX_TPM_MOD_MOD;
Ditto.
> + /* calculate real period HW can support */
> + tmp = period_count;
> + tmp *= (1 << prescale) * NSEC_PER_SEC;
I don't know what the compiler does here, I guess it is a bit easier for
it to optimise here if you write:
tmp = (u64)period_count << prescale;
tmp *= NSEC_PER_SEC;
> + real_period = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(tmp, rate);
> +
> + return real_period;
> +}
> +
> +static void pwm_imx_tpm_config_counter(struct pwm_chip *chip, u32 period)
> +{
> + struct imx_tpm_pwm_chip *tpm = to_imx_tpm_pwm_chip(chip);
> + u32 val, rate, prescale, saved_cmod;
> + u64 tmp;
> +
> + rate = clk_get_rate(tpm->clk);
> + tmp = period;
> + tmp *= rate;
> + tmp = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(tmp, NSEC_PER_SEC);
> + if (tmp <= PWM_IMX_TPM_MAX_COUNT) {
> + prescale = 0;
> + } else {
> + prescale = roundup_pow_of_two(tmp /
> + (PWM_IMX_TPM_MAX_COUNT + 1));
> + prescale = ilog2(prescale);
> + }
> +
> + /* make sure counter is disabled for programming prescale */
> + val = readl(tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_SC);
> + saved_cmod = FIELD_GET(PWM_IMX_TPM_SC_CMOD, val);
> + if (saved_cmod) {
> + val &= ~PWM_IMX_TPM_SC_CMOD;
> + writel(val, tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_SC);
> + }
> +
> + /* set TPM counter prescale */
> + val = readl(tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_SC);
> + val &= ~PWM_IMX_TPM_SC_PS;
> + val |= FIELD_PREP(PWM_IMX_TPM_SC_PS, prescale);
> + writel(val, tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_SC);
> +
> + /*
> + * set period count: according to RM, the MOD register is
> + * updated immediately after CMOD[1:0] = 2b'00 above
> + */
> + val = (tmp + ((1 << prescale) >> 1)) >> prescale;
> + writel(val, tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_MOD);
> +
> + /* restore the clock mode if necessary */
> + if (saved_cmod) {
> + val = readl(tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_SC);
> + val |= FIELD_PREP(PWM_IMX_TPM_SC_CMOD, saved_cmod);
> + writel(val, tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_SC);
> + }
> +
> + tpm->real_period = period;
> +}
> +
> +static void pwm_imx_tpm_config(struct pwm_chip *chip,
> + struct pwm_device *pwm,
> + u32 period,
> + u32 duty_cycle,
> + enum pwm_polarity polarity)
> +{
> + struct imx_tpm_pwm_chip *tpm = to_imx_tpm_pwm_chip(chip);
> + struct imx_tpm_pwm_channel *chan = pwm_get_chip_data(pwm);
> + u32 val;
> + u64 tmp;
> +
> + /* set duty counter */
> + tmp = readl(tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_MOD) & PWM_IMX_TPM_MOD_MOD;
> + tmp *= duty_cycle;
> + val = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(tmp, period);
> + writel(val, tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_CnV(pwm->hwpwm));
> +
> + /*
> + * set polarity (for edge-aligned PWM modes)
> + *
> + * ELS[1:0] = 2b10 yields normal polarity behaviour,
> + * ELS[1:0] = 2b01 yields inversed polarity.
> + * The other values are reserved.
> + */
> + val = readl(tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC(pwm->hwpwm));
> + val &= ~(PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC_ELS | PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC_MSA);
> + val |= PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC_MSB;
> + val |= (polarity == PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL) ?
> + FIELD_PREP(PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC_ELS, 0x2) :
> + FIELD_PREP(PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC_ELS, 0x1);
> + /*
> + * polarity settings will enabled/disable output status
> + * immediately, so here ONLY save the config and write
> + * it into register when channel is enabled/disabled.
> + */
> + chan->config = val;
This function's behaviour is strange. It configures the hardware with
the right the duty_cycle but not the polarity. I cannot imagine that
this not buggy.
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * When a channel's polarity is configured, the polarity settings
> + * will be saved and ONLY write into the register when the channel
> + * is enabled.
> + *
> + * When a channel is disabled, its polarity settings will be saved
> + * and its output will be disabled by clearing polarity settings.
> + *
> + * When a channel is enabled, its polarity settings will be restored
> + * and output will be enabled again.
> + */
> +static void pwm_imx_tpm_enable(struct pwm_chip *chip,
> + struct pwm_device *pwm,
> + bool enable)
> +{
> + struct imx_tpm_pwm_chip *tpm = to_imx_tpm_pwm_chip(chip);
> + struct imx_tpm_pwm_channel *chan = pwm_get_chip_data(pwm);
> + u32 val;
> +
> + val = readl(tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_SC);
> + if (enable) {
> + /* restore channel config */
> + writel(chan->config,
> + tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC(pwm->hwpwm));
> +
> + if (++tpm->enable_count == 1) {
> + /* start TPM counter */
> + val |= PWM_IMX_TPM_SC_CMOD_INC_EVERY_CLK;
> + writel(val, tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_SC);
> + }
> + } else {
> + /* disable channel */
> + val = readl(tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC(pwm->hwpwm));
> + val &= ~(PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC_MSA | PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC_MSB |
> + PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC_ELS);
> + writel(val, tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC(pwm->hwpwm));
> +
> + if (--tpm->enable_count == 0) {
> + /* stop TPM counter since all channels are disabled */
> + val &= ~PWM_IMX_TPM_SC_CMOD;
> + writel(val, tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_SC);
> + }
> + }
> +
> + /* update channel status */
> + chan->status = enable;
> +}
> +
> +static void pwm_imx_tpm_get_state(struct pwm_chip *chip,
> + struct pwm_device *pwm,
> + struct pwm_state *state)
> +{
> + struct imx_tpm_pwm_chip *tpm = to_imx_tpm_pwm_chip(chip);
> + u32 rate, val;
> + u64 tmp;
> +
> + /* get period */
> + state->period = tpm->real_period;
> +
> + /* get duty cycle */
> + rate = clk_get_rate(tpm->clk);
> + val = readl(tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_SC);
> + val = FIELD_GET(PWM_IMX_TPM_SC_PS, val);
> + tmp = readl(tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_CnV(pwm->hwpwm));
> + tmp *= (1 << val) * NSEC_PER_SEC;
> + state->duty_cycle = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(tmp, rate);
> +
> + /* get polarity */
> + val = readl(tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC(pwm->hwpwm));
> + if (FIELD_GET(PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC_ELS, val) == 0x1)
> + state->polarity = PWM_POLARITY_INVERSED;
> + else if (FIELD_GET(PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC_ELS, val) == 0x2)
> + state->polarity = PWM_POLARITY_NORMAL;
else ?
> +
> + /* get channel status */
> + state->enabled = FIELD_GET(PWM_IMX_TPM_CnSC_ELS, val) ? true : false;
> +}
> +
> +static int pwm_imx_tpm_apply(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm,
> + struct pwm_state *state)
> +{
> + struct imx_tpm_pwm_chip *tpm = to_imx_tpm_pwm_chip(chip);
> + struct imx_tpm_pwm_channel *chan = pwm_get_chip_data(pwm);
> + u32 p;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&tpm->lock);
> +
> + if (state->period != tpm->real_period) {
> + /*
> + * TPM counter is shared by multiple channels, so
> + * prescale and period can NOT be modified when
> + * there are multiple channels in use with different
> + * period settings.
> + */
> + p = pwm_imx_tpm_round_period(chip, state->period);
> + if (p != tpm->real_period && tpm->user_count != 1)
> + return -EBUSY;
> + else if (p != tpm->real_period)
> + pwm_imx_tpm_config_counter(chip, p);
> + }
This looks more complicated than it should be. What about:
p = pwm_imx_tpm_round_period(chip, state->period);
if (p != tpm->real_period) {
if (tpm->user_count != 1)
return -EBUSY;
pwm_imx_tpm_config_counter(chip, p);
}
Another optimisation is possible here as pwm_imx_tpm_round_period and
pwm_imx_tpm_config_counter do effectively the same calculations: Let
pwm_imx_tpm_round_period return the respective register values that are
then just written to the registers instead of recalculating them once
more.
> + if (state->enabled == false) {
> + /*
> + * if eventually the PWM output is LOW, either
> + * duty cycle is 0 or status is disabled, need
> + * to make sure the output pin is LOW.
> + */
> + pwm_imx_tpm_config(chip, pwm, state->period,
> + 0, state->polarity);
> + if (chan->status == true)
> + pwm_imx_tpm_enable(chip, pwm, false);
> + } else {
> + pwm_imx_tpm_config(chip, pwm, state->period,
> + state->duty_cycle, state->polarity);
> + if (chan->status == false)
> + pwm_imx_tpm_enable(chip, pwm, true);
> + }
This function is really hard to understand. The factors making this
complicated are:
- Strange semantic of pwm_imx_tpm_config, IMHO the things done in both
pwm_imx_tpm_config and pwm_imx_tpm_enable should be done in a single
function.
- "status" could better be names "enabled"
IMHO it should look like:
int my_apply(chip, pwm, state)
{
ret = my_round_state(state, &hwparams);
if (ret)
return ret;
mutex_lock();
if (usercount > 1 &&
my_hwparams_interfere(current_state, hwparams))
ret = -EBUSY;
goto out_unlock;
my_apply_to_hardware(hwparams);
mutex_unlock();
out_unlock:
return ret;
}
> + mutex_unlock(&tpm->lock);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int pwm_imx_tpm_request(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm)
> +{
> + struct imx_tpm_pwm_chip *tpm = to_imx_tpm_pwm_chip(chip);
> + struct imx_tpm_pwm_channel *chan;
> +
> + chan = devm_kzalloc(chip->dev, sizeof(*chan), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!chan)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + pwm_set_chip_data(pwm, chan);
> +
> + mutex_lock(&tpm->lock);
> + tpm->user_count++;
> + mutex_unlock(&tpm->lock);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void pwm_imx_tpm_free(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct pwm_device *pwm)
> +{
> + struct imx_tpm_pwm_chip *tpm = to_imx_tpm_pwm_chip(chip);
> +
> + mutex_lock(&tpm->lock);
> + tpm->user_count--;
> + mutex_unlock(&tpm->lock);
> +
> + devm_kfree(chip->dev, pwm_get_chip_data(pwm));
> + pwm_set_chip_data(pwm, NULL);
> +}
> +
> +static const struct pwm_ops imx_tpm_pwm_ops = {
> + .request = pwm_imx_tpm_request,
> + .free = pwm_imx_tpm_free,
> + .get_state = pwm_imx_tpm_get_state,
> + .apply = pwm_imx_tpm_apply,
> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> +};
> +
> +static int pwm_imx_tpm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct imx_tpm_pwm_chip *tpm;
> + int ret;
> + u32 val;
> +
> + tpm = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*tpm), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!tpm)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, tpm);
> +
> + tpm->base = devm_platform_ioremap_resource(pdev, 0);
> + if (IS_ERR(tpm->base))
> + return PTR_ERR(tpm->base);
> +
> + tpm->clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, NULL);
> + if (IS_ERR(tpm->clk)) {
> + ret = PTR_ERR(tpm->clk);
> + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev,
> + "failed to get PWM clock: %d\n", ret);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + ret = clk_prepare_enable(tpm->clk);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev,
> + "failed to prepare or enable clock: %d\n", ret);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + tpm->chip.dev = &pdev->dev;
> + tpm->chip.ops = &imx_tpm_pwm_ops;
> + tpm->chip.base = -1;
> + tpm->chip.of_xlate = of_pwm_xlate_with_flags;
> + tpm->chip.of_pwm_n_cells = 3;
> +
> + /* get number of channels */
> + val = readl(tpm->base + PWM_IMX_TPM_PARAM);
> + tpm->chip.npwm = FIELD_GET(PWM_IMX_TPM_PARAM_CHAN, val);
> +
> + mutex_init(&tpm->lock);
> +
> + ret = pwmchip_add(&tpm->chip);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to add PWM chip: %d\n", ret);
> + clk_disable_unprepare(tpm->clk);
> + }
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static int pwm_imx_tpm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct imx_tpm_pwm_chip *tpm = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> + int ret = pwmchip_remove(&tpm->chip);
> +
> + clk_disable_unprepare(tpm->clk);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static int __maybe_unused pwm_imx_tpm_suspend(struct device *dev)
> +{
> + struct imx_tpm_pwm_chip *tpm = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> +
> + if (tpm->enable_count == 0)
> + clk_disable_unprepare(tpm->clk);
> +
> + return 0;
IMHO you should return an error if enable_count isn't 0 to prevent going
to suspend.
> +}
> +
> +static int __maybe_unused pwm_imx_tpm_resume(struct device *dev)
> +{
> + struct imx_tpm_pwm_chip *tpm = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + if (tpm->enable_count == 0) {
> + ret = clk_prepare_enable(tpm->clk);
> + if (ret)
> + dev_err(dev,
> + "failed to prepare or enable clock: %d\n",
> + ret);
> + }
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(imx_tpm_pwm_pm,
> + pwm_imx_tpm_suspend, pwm_imx_tpm_resume);
> +
> +static const struct of_device_id imx_tpm_pwm_dt_ids[] = {
> + { .compatible = "fsl,imx-tpm", },
> + { /* sentinel */ }
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, imx_tpm_pwm_dt_ids);
> +
> +static struct platform_driver imx_tpm_pwm_driver = {
> + .driver = {
> + .name = "imx-tpm-pwm",
> + .of_match_table = imx_tpm_pwm_dt_ids,
> + .pm = &imx_tpm_pwm_pm,
> + },
> + .probe = pwm_imx_tpm_probe,
> + .remove = pwm_imx_tpm_remove,
> +};
> +module_platform_driver(imx_tpm_pwm_driver);
> +
> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Anson Huang <Anson.Huang@xxxxxxx>");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("i.MX TPM PWM Driver");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |