Re: [PATCH RFC 2/6] pwm: core: Add option to config PWM duty/period with u64 data length

Uwe Kleine-König
2020-07-27T07:52:57Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1391 bytes --]

Hello Martin,

On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 09:29:19AM +0200, Martin Botka wrote:
> 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 ?

I hit "reply-to-all" and the mail only was sent to you because you wrote
to only me.

Also threading is somehow strange because your reply to my mail (with

Message-Id: 20200727070411.ovkuwm76vuw3heo7@pengutronix.de

) has

In-Reply-To: <CADQ2G_HkiAZx8OhfQ_jeizveMaB-QN9dfN6Tcwfk9XuF97rmOg@mail.gmail.com>

. So I assume all the strange things happened on your side until proved
otherwise. :-)

Best regards
Uwe

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

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]