On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 08:24:30PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 09:55:05AM -0700, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 03:31:04PM -0700, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> > > Because period and duty cycle are defined in the PWM framework structs as
> > > ints
>
On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 09:55:05AM -0700, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 03:31:04PM -0700, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> > Because period and duty cycle are defined in the PWM framework structs as
> > ints
> > with units of nanoseconds, the maximum time duration that can be set
On Thu, 11 Jun 2020, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 03:31:04PM -0700, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> > Because period and duty cycle are defined in the PWM framework structs as
> > ints
> > with units of nanoseconds, the maximum time duration that can be set is
> > limited
> >
On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 03:31:04PM -0700, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> Because period and duty cycle are defined in the PWM framework structs as ints
> with units of nanoseconds, the maximum time duration that can be set is
> limited
> to ~2.147 seconds. Consequently, applications desiring to set g
Because period and duty cycle are defined in the PWM framework structs as ints
with units of nanoseconds, the maximum time duration that can be set is limited
to ~2.147 seconds. Consequently, applications desiring to set greater time
periods via the PWM framework are not be able to do so - like, fo
5 matches
Mail list logo