linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v16 1/2] pwm: add microchip soft ip corePWM driver

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20230418151814.xawtejnsoguelrwq@pengutronix.de>
Date:   Tue, 18 Apr 2023 17:18:14 +0200
From:   Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To:     Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
Cc:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Daire McNamara <daire.mcnamara@...rochip.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v16 1/2] pwm: add microchip soft ip corePWM driver

Hello Conor,

On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 02:27:09PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 03:08:37PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 12:27:33PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > I'm quite obviously missing something that you may think is obvious
> > > here, but is not immediately clear to me.
> > 
> > That would be an explanation, yes. :-)
> 
> Right, it makes a lot more sense now. Definitely was not clear to me
> that that was what you were suggesting.

I reread what I wrote and maybe I wouldn't have understood it either :-)

> I'm not sure that disallowing tmp < 255 is something I want to do
> though, as this is mainly used as a "soft" IP core in the FPGA fabric,
> the clock provided to it may not be particularly high.
> Probably not the end of the world though, once added to the limitations.
> 
> The implemented period is also going to be quite a ways off with this
> method (compared to the method I have been using until now) - although
> it is of course far simpler.

"simpler" is in my eyes a good approach until someone comes who has
stronger needs than can be done with a simple approach. Until this
happens a simple approach is good for everyone.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)