Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Heiko =?ISO-8859-1?Q?St=FCbner?= <heiko@sntech.de>
To:     Cristian Ciocaltea <cristian.ciocaltea@collabora.com>,
        Chris Morgan <macroalpha82@gmail.com>
Cc:     Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, kernel@collabora.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: rk3588-rock-5b: Add pwm-fan
Date:   Mon, 03 Apr 2023 23:55:17 +0200
Message-ID: <4981873.LvFx2qVVIh@diego>
In-Reply-To: <642b134c.4a0a0220.1d01a.5990@mx.google.com>
References: <20230403105052.426135-1-cristian.ciocaltea@collabora.com>
 <20230403105052.426135-3-cristian.ciocaltea@collabora.com>
 <642b134c.4a0a0220.1d01a.5990@mx.google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Precedence: bulk

Am Montag, 3. April 2023, 19:56:26 CEST schrieb Chris Morgan:
> On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 01:50:52PM +0300, Cristian Ciocaltea wrote:
> > Add the necessary DT changes for the Rock 5B board to enable support for
> > the PWM controlled heat sink fan.
> 
> Honest question, but should we be adding this to the board file if not
> every device has a PWM fan (they all have the socket for the fan, but
> not the fan)? For example I have a passively cooled case that doesn't
> include a fan.

We also set up the sdmmc host without knowing if the user will plug in
an sd-card ;-) .

So especially in the case where there is a dedicated socket for it,
as you write, we should definitly add it for the board.

By the way, am I correct in thinking that patch 1 and 2 are actually
independent of each other? So I'd just pick patch2 for the Rockchip tree
(as we do have a text-binding) and you can handle the yaml conversion
in a followup or whatever?

Thanks
Heiko