Re: [PATCH] igb: fix PHC stopping on max freq

["Vick, Matthew" <matthew.vick@intel.com>]

On 3/20/13 12:11 PM, "Jiri Benc" <jbenc@redhat.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 21:17:25 +0000, Vick, Matthew wrote:
>> Good catch on this, Jiri! I know the math works out the same, but I'd
>> prefer it if you changed the max_adj value to 999999999, since that is
>> technically what we can accept before we have any issues. If you
>>re-submit
>> with this change, I'll add my ACK and we can run it through our internal
>> testing. Thanks!
>
>But the real maximum value is actually 999999881, as anything higher
>than that would be capped to 999999881 by the driver. I don't think the
>driver should advertise higher max_adj than it is able to fulfill,
>otherwise there would be no need for the field.

I prefer 999999999 as it's something that looks slightly less "magic
number"-y (plus looks like the other devices in igb) and is still
technically something that can be passed down without error. Ultimately
not a big deal and I can understand your argument, so I'm okay putting my
personal preference aside on this one.