Re: [PATCH v5 07/16] pwm: crc: Fix period / duty_cycle times being off by a factor of 256

2020-07-30 Thread Andy Shevchenko
On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 03:37:44PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > While looking into adding atomic-pwm support to the pwm-crc driver I > noticed something odd, there is a PWM_BASE_CLK define of 6 MHz and > there is a clock-divider which divides this with a value between 1-128, > and there are 256 du

Re: [PATCH v5 07/16] pwm: crc: Fix period / duty_cycle times being off by a factor of 256

2020-07-28 Thread Andy Shevchenko
On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 03:37:44PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > While looking into adding atomic-pwm support to the pwm-crc driver I > noticed something odd, there is a PWM_BASE_CLK define of 6 MHz and > there is a clock-divider which divides this with a value between 1-128, > and there are 256 du

Re: [PATCH v5 07/16] pwm: crc: Fix period / duty_cycle times being off by a factor of 256

2020-07-28 Thread Hans de Goede
Hi, On 7/28/20 9:36 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 03:37:44PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: While looking into adding atomic-pwm support to the pwm-crc driver I noticed something odd, there is a PWM_BASE_CLK define of 6 MHz and there is a clock-divider which divides this with

[PATCH v5 07/16] pwm: crc: Fix period / duty_cycle times being off by a factor of 256

2020-07-17 Thread Hans de Goede
While looking into adding atomic-pwm support to the pwm-crc driver I noticed something odd, there is a PWM_BASE_CLK define of 6 MHz and there is a clock-divider which divides this with a value between 1-128, and there are 256 duty-cycle steps. The pwm-crc code before this commit assumed that a clo