On Thu, 24 Jun 2021, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Hi Lee,
>
> On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 02:12:57PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Jun 2021, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> >
> > > The practical upside here is that this only needs a single API call to
> > > program the hardware which (depending on t
Hi Lee,
On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 02:12:57PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jun 2021, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
>
> > The practical upside here is that this only needs a single API call to
> > program the hardware which (depending on the underlaying hardware) can
> > be more effective and preve
On Mon, 21 Jun 2021, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> The practical upside here is that this only needs a single API call to
> program the hardware which (depending on the underlaying hardware) can
> be more effective and prevents glitches.
>
> Up to now the return value of the pwm functions was ignored
On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 02:21:48PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> The practical upside here is that this only needs a single API call to
> program the hardware which (depending on the underlaying hardware) can
> be more effective and prevents glitches.
>
> Up to now the return value of the pwm f
The practical upside here is that this only needs a single API call to
program the hardware which (depending on the underlaying hardware) can
be more effective and prevents glitches.
Up to now the return value of the pwm functions was ignored. Fix this
and propagate the error to the caller.
Signe
