[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200213202804.pqgbqtphuboqo6af@pengutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 21:28:04 +0100
From: Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Guru Das Srinagesh <gurus@...eaurora.org>
Cc: linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Subbaraman Narayanamurthy <subbaram@...eaurora.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND v5 2/2] pwm: core: Convert period and duty cycle to u64
Hello,
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 11:39:26AM -0800, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 11:18:02AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 10:54:08AM -0800, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> > > @@ -305,8 +305,8 @@ struct pwm_chip {
> > > * @duty_cycle: duty cycle of the PWM signal (in nanoseconds)
> > > */
> > > struct pwm_capture {
> > > - unsigned int period;
> > > - unsigned int duty_cycle;
> > > + u64 period;
> > > + u64 duty_cycle;
> > > };
> >
> > Is this last hunk a separate change?
> >
> > Otherwise looks fine.
>
> No, this is very much a part of the change and not a separate one.
Not sure we understand each other. I wondered if conversion of the
pwm_capture stuff should be done separately. (OTOH I wonder if this is
used at all and already considered deleting it.)
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Powered by blists - more mailing lists