Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: hwmon: pwm-fan: Document default-pwm property

[Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com>]

On 1/3/25 09:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 03/01/2025 08:59, Peter Korsgaard wrote:
>> On 1/2/25 19:22, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 02/01/2025 18:50, Peter Korsgaard wrote:
>>>> The pwm-fan driver uses full PWM (255) duty cycle at startup, which may not
>>>> always be desirable because of noise or power consumption peaks, so add an
>>>> optional "default-pwm" property that can be used to specify a custom default
>>>> PWM duty cycle.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com>
>>>
>>> That's v3, not v1. Also mention here shortly how Rob's comment is addressed.
>>
>> It is? Then that wasn't from me, and I don't right away see anything
>> related on lore. Can you give me a pointer?
> 
> It is trivial to find your v1 and v2 in lore, so I assume you just reply
> here to waste my time.

Sorry, I indeed apparently did send a v1/v2 ~1 year ago, I must be 
getting old. I didn't look that far back in lore and for some reason I 
don't have the changes in my local tree anymore, hence the reason for 
recreating the commits yesterday and sending a new v1.

Looking at lore, v1 used target-pwm which Gunter suggested I changed to 
default-rpm while explaining that it cannot be a generic property:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/b717da30-1d4c-4e09-b98c-4aa41a235234@roeck-us.net/

Which I then did as a v2, that then didn't get any additional feedback:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/3aa21a01-c994-4b36-8893-181e55a60c5e@korsgaard.com/

So if we agree on default-pwm, then I can send an update (a v4!) with 
the typo in the example fixed, OK?

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard