Linus Walleij writes:
> The PWM backlight still supports passing a enable GPIO line as
> platform data using the legacy API.
>
> It turns out that ever board using this mechanism except one
> is pass .enable_gpio = -1. So we drop all these cargo-culted -1's
> from all instances of this platform
On Fri, 13 Dec 2019 at 11:23, Linus Walleij wrote:
>
> The PWM backlight still supports passing a enable GPIO line as
> platform data using the legacy API.
>
> It turns out that ever board using this mechanism except one
> is pass .enable_gpio = -1. So we drop all these cargo-culted -1's
> from a
On Fri, 13 Dec 2019, Linus Walleij wrote:
> The PWM backlight still supports passing a enable GPIO line as
> platform data using the legacy API.
>
> It turns out that ever board using this mechanism except one
> is pass .enable_gpio = -1. So we drop all these cargo-culted -1's
> from all instanc
On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 11:23:46AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> The PWM backlight still supports passing a enable GPIO line as
> platform data using the legacy API.
>
> It turns out that ever board using this mechanism except one
> is pass .enable_gpio = -1. So we drop all these cargo-culted -1'
The PWM backlight still supports passing a enable GPIO line as
platform data using the legacy API.
It turns out that ever board using this mechanism except one
is pass .enable_gpio = -1. So we drop all these cargo-culted -1's
from all instances of this platform data in the kernel.
The remaning b
