On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 10:22:40PM +0100, Stefan Wahren wrote: > Hi Remi, > > Am 29.11.2015 um 01:31 schrieb Remi Pommarel: > >Hi Stefan, > > > >On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 09:52:07PM +0100, Stefan Wahren wrote: > >>i applied the series including the devicetree modification, but it > >>doesn't work for me. > >> > >>First of all i get an ugly division by zero warning from the pwm > >>driver. The pwm driver still assume a fixed clock and doesn't handle > >>the error cases of clk_get_rate(). I attached a patch at the end. > > > >Yes the devicetree patch from patchset version one does not work with > >this version. > > thanks. I successfully tested the pwm with the led pwm driver. >
Good news, thank you. > >I haven't sent the modified devicetree because Eric said > >it is better to send it in a separate patchset. If you want to test it I > >attached the working devicetree patch at the end. > > I don't think that he said that. He wanted you to send the > devicetree changes as a separate patch. So it should be okay if it's > part of the same patchset. > I could have misunderstood him, sorry about that. I will send a devicetree separated patch with the next version if Eric agrees with the GENMASK logic used in my first patch. Best Regards, -- Remi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-clk" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
