linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Add PWM clock support for bcm2835

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20151129222549.GI491@cruxbox>
Date:	Sun, 29 Nov 2015 23:25:49 +0100
From:	Remi Pommarel <repk@...plefau.lt>
To:	Stefan Wahren <info@...egoodbye.de>
Cc:	Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
	Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
	linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Bart Tanghe <bart.tanghe@...masmore.be>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Add PWM clock support for bcm2835

On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 10:22:40PM +0100, Stefan Wahren wrote:
> Hi Remi,
> 
> Am 29.11.2015 um 01:31 schrieb Remi Pommarel:
> >Hi Stefan,
> >
> >On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 09:52:07PM +0100, Stefan Wahren wrote:
> >>i applied the series including the devicetree modification, but it
> >>doesn't work for me.
> >>
> >>First of all i get an ugly division by zero warning from the pwm
> >>driver. The pwm driver still assume a fixed clock and doesn't handle
> >>the error cases of clk_get_rate(). I attached a patch at the end.
> >
> >Yes the devicetree patch from patchset version one does not work with
> >this version.
> 
> thanks. I successfully tested the pwm with the led pwm driver.
> 

Good news, thank you.

> >I haven't sent the modified devicetree because Eric said
> >it is better to send it in a separate patchset. If you want to test it I
> >attached the working devicetree patch at the end.
> 
> I don't think that he said that. He wanted you to send the
> devicetree changes as a separate patch. So it should be okay if it's
> part of the same patchset.
> 

I could have misunderstood him, sorry about that. I will send a
devicetree separated patch with the next version if Eric agrees with the
GENMASK logic used in my first patch.

Best Regards,

-- 
Remi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/