[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1583724941.15393.8.camel@mtksdccf07>
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2020 11:35:41 +0800
From: Sam Shih <sam.shih@...iatek.com>
To: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
"Uwe Kleine-König"
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
CC: <linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
"John Crispin" <john@...ozen.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] pwm: mediatek: add longer period support
Hello,
On Sun, 2020-03-08 at 21:18 +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Sat, Mar 07, 2020 at 10:28:36PM +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> > On 03/03/2020 11:19, Sam Shih wrote:
> > > The pwm clock source could be divided by 1625 with PWM_CON
> > > BIT(3) setting in mediatek hardware.
> > >
> > > This patch add support for longer pwm period configuration,
> > > which allowing blinking LEDs via pwm interface.
> >
> > Is this a fix? In this case please provide a Fixes tag with the commit ID which
> > introduced the bug.
>
> I'd say it qualifies as a fix if without it a request with a long period
> returns success but isn't properly implemented. Otherwise it's only a
> new feature.
>
It's only a new feature.
Without this patch, pwm_mediatek_config return -EINVAL when receive a
long period request.
I will send v3 to reply Uwe's comment.
Best Regards,
Sam Shih
Powered by blists - more mailing lists