As suggested, round up the counter variables to ensure we always produce a longer period calculation. Reported-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/pwm/pwm-dwc-core.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-dwc-core.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-dwc-core.c index 3b856685029d..6358e3345210 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-dwc-core.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-dwc-core.c @@ -50,13 +50,13 @@ static int __dwc_pwm_configure_timer(struct dwc_pwm *dwc, * 2^32 periods. */ tmp = state->duty_cycle * dwc->clk_rate; - tmp = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(tmp, NSEC_PER_SEC); + tmp = DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(tmp, NSEC_PER_SEC); if (tmp < 1 || tmp > (1ULL << 32)) return -ERANGE; low = tmp - 1; tmp = (state->period - state->duty_cycle) * dwc->clk_rate; - tmp = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST_ULL(tmp, NSEC_PER_SEC); + tmp = DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(tmp, NSEC_PER_SEC); if (tmp < 1 || tmp > (1ULL << 32)) return -ERANGE; high = tmp - 1; -- 2.40.1
