Hi Guru,
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 10:05 PM Guru Das Srinagesh
[off-list ref] wrote:
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 09:18:34AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 4:17 PM Thierry Reding [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
The PWM core will soon change the duty cycle and period of PWMs to 64
bits to allow for a broader range of values. Use a 64-bit format
specifier to avoid a warning when that change is made.
Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <redacted>
quoted
--- a/drivers/video/fbdev/ssd1307fb.c
+++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/ssd1307fb.c
@@ -312,7 +312,7 @@ static int ssd1307fb_init(struct ssd1307fb_par *par)
/* Enable the PWM */
pwm_enable(par->pwm);
- dev_dbg(&par->client->dev, "Using PWM%d with a %dns period.\n",
+ dev_dbg(&par->client->dev, "Using PWM%d with a %lluns period.\n",
par->pwm->pwm, pwm_get_period(par->pwm));
}
This change must be done together with changing the return type of
pwm_get_period(), else you will get a compiler warning, and will print a
bogus value.
Hi Geert,
Yes, this is already being done in the patch series [1] that forms the
base for this specific patch.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/64f9ba1c9d6c49a397f12846493707883cee430f.1591136989.git.gurus@codeaurora.org/ (local)
IC, but the "will soon" suggested otherwise.
In any case, not combining both into a single patch causes a bisection
regression, regardless of the order in which they are applied.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds