From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 12:17:05 -0700 From: Stephen Boyd To: Maxime Ripard Cc: Mike Turquette , Emilio Lopez , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Chen-Yu Tsai , Hans de Goede , linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] clk: Add a basic multiplier clock Message-ID: <20151007191705.GA26883@codeaurora.org> References: <1443512353-28073-1-git-send-email-maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> <1443512353-28073-2-git-send-email-maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> <20151002204308.GY12338@codeaurora.org> <20151005101932.GH2696@lukather> <20151005180929.GB12338@codeaurora.org> <20151007110457.GF2278@lukather> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20151007110457.GF2278@lukather> List-ID: On 10/07, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 11:09:29AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > On 10/05, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > > > > Actually, the logic is also reversed. > > > > > > The divider driver will always try to find some rate that is higher > > > than the one we already have, without going above than the one > > > requested. > > > > > > Here, we're tring to be lower than the best rate, without going below > > > the requested rate. > > > > So then a tri-state flag that indicates, closest, less than, > > greater than? > > Still, the computation itself is different, and the only consolidation > we could possibly do is by not duplicating the ROUND_CLOSEST. We would > end up with two different code pathes in the same function, which I > feel would make it unnecessarily complex. Ok. No worries. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project