[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CADQ2G_HYTE6cd=PM2JzCTadkPe2DDb8dxObPdPJtz1626ktE9Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 09:29:19 +0200
From: Martin Botka <martin.botka1@...il.com>
To: Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Fenglin Wu <fenglinw@...eaurora.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...il.com>,
Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Linux LED Subsystem <linux-leds@...r.kernel.org>,
devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org,
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/6] pwm: core: Add option to config PWM duty/period
with u64 data length
Hello Uwe,
On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 09:12:23PM +0200, Martin Botka wrote:
>> > Note there is already a series that changes these values to u64. See
>> > a9d887dc1c60ed67f2271d66560cdcf864c4a578 in linux-next.
>>
>> Amazing. But isn't there the same issue with it as this one where this
>> would fail to build on 32 bit architecture?
>
> In theory all these cases are coped for. I didn't see any problems yet,
> so I still assume also the 32 bit archs are fine.
OK then all is fine. I will drop the patch in V2.
Also Uwe i just realized that you sent the original message and also
this reply only to me and not to anyone else.
Could you please send the messages also to everyone else ?
Thank you.
Best regards,
Martin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists