From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A273DC433E4 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 07:30:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EDC82070B for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 07:30:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="qH2CjIts" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726814AbgG0H36 (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jul 2020 03:29:58 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:57528 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726213AbgG0H36 (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jul 2020 03:29:58 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-x543.google.com (mail-ed1-x543.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::543]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1047EC0619D2; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 00:29:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x543.google.com with SMTP id b13so8975173edz.7; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 00:29:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/SS2tH+znVFwsX6rkJmypmxpV9S8bPpCHrpiOj20R8U=; b=qH2CjItsOC8efLdB17RxpsOOHLZm4nhmPZjXQjWEBhOQnAdYEy0Innx9mODaTuBUsL lc4Xx3skXLxB5fc4ds5e9RXXaqbf1vA8cpt5xXaFPWEswgwnFVu2TjEwy+NZcFikUED7 qXRQFwRtJTJaQSUu9Fb/33Y5OfAOUm021ySeRYyVGDbcOcpPpCBiJ2gL13LA1DZplcjH IE2yFB33XhnLfuXMunOTgjVcXLmihi47JbQau27elL2GS7lNiyg5PHiG7dcf1HTM0/va rvraSilnxV3oG0xgMrXubRYQR4pxejYUfAw78qdYbfu0VcPNJApCrwQNbFnzqoC6mMz2 wQVQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/SS2tH+znVFwsX6rkJmypmxpV9S8bPpCHrpiOj20R8U=; b=HAwMD0PgohW3DIAun89Ce6IwMNnygeM1oraF8nOnGPatTKBuXbxxaM2Uk5RXWn8N6t jRaAHvh3RKm7yx5KpQCucMOMF7X/OjrVh2aS56aPYcFLXGDzhXKjIOdiiCnIgr98jIZL DCvK/6HyEB0VbRBHHSLMUeuk653A6GmoZC/N+7/TsvkBYPP51uiRQIVsXghdcLjvEeiD G76NXxDjRuCAR2xXEpyQYqLtnWKLD8e0E5+p+LG39gKHzlePM48AlDRYZx899qMInLXZ 3dL5SF8FDcLygFg2VNi0CiMaOf/FqjYObUe+KEPhcuhOVOPLuf0KFypTpeKFIumtUJtg onRQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533jpvaUpXe80Lo8GIoWalLJCSk8MzVglAGW0venLXDWioYxUZiB ypxSxa9tAFTrhE1NXgZ/xUD/bAY/so39mktu9p4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx3zAe7GHpQ50dWJVcLEvnofVYIk9+W7vz3pQLvKKXzZ14wYkHL2FIwpfb1D6I8xQVjFIllx4rqnAGOS7GoibU= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:84e:: with SMTP id b14mr7308362edz.322.1595834996797; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 00:29:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200724213659.273599-1-martin.botka1@gmail.com> <20200724213659.273599-3-martin.botka1@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Martin Botka Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 09:29:19 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/6] pwm: core: Add option to config PWM duty/period with u64 data length To: =?UTF-8?Q?Uwe_Kleine=2DK=C3=B6nig?= Cc: Fenglin Wu , Konrad Dybcio , Jacek Anaszewski , Pavel Machek , Dan Murphy , Rob Herring , Thierry Reding , Lee Jones , Linux LED Subsystem , devicetree , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, Andy Shevchenko Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-pwm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org 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