Re: [RFC] pwm: core: unsigned or signed ints for pwm_config

2015-10-05 Thread Thierry Reding
On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 08:46:43PM +0200, Olliver Schinagl wrote: > Hey Thierry, > > On 29-09-15 09:45, Thierry Reding wrote: > >On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 09:19:27AM +0200, Olliver Schinagl wrote: > >>Hey Thierry, list > >> > >>I'm going over the pwm core and notice that in the pwm header, duty_ns a

Re: [RFC] pwm: core: unsigned or signed ints for pwm_config

2015-10-01 Thread Olliver Schinagl
Hey Thierry, On 29-09-15 09:45, Thierry Reding wrote: On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 09:19:27AM +0200, Olliver Schinagl wrote: Hey Thierry, list I'm going over the pwm core and notice that in the pwm header, duty_ns and period_ns is internally stored as an unsigned int. struct pwm_device { cons

Re: [RFC] pwm: core: unsigned or signed ints for pwm_config

2015-09-29 Thread Thierry Reding
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 09:19:27AM +0200, Olliver Schinagl wrote: > Hey Thierry, list > > I'm going over the pwm core and notice that in the pwm header, duty_ns and > period_ns is internally stored as an unsigned int. > > struct pwm_device { > const char *label; > unsigned long flags; >

[RFC] pwm: core: unsigned or signed ints for pwm_config

2015-09-29 Thread Olliver Schinagl
Hey Thierry, list I'm going over the pwm core and notice that in the pwm header, duty_ns and period_ns is internally stored as an unsigned int. struct pwm_device { const char *label; unsigned long flags; unsigned int hwpwm; unsigned int pwm; struct pwm_chip *chip; void