From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751886AbaEZLFa (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 26 May 2014 07:05:30 -0400
Received: from v094114.home.net.pl ([79.96.170.134]:59868 "HELO
	v094114.home.net.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with SMTP id S1751705AbaEZLF3 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 26 May 2014 07:05:29 -0400
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=F6ren?= Brinkmann <soren.brinkmann@xilinx.com>,
        Mike Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>,
        Uwe =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Kleine=2DK=F6nig?= 
	<u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>,
        Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
        "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>,
        "cpufreq@vger.kernel.org" <cpufreq@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] clk: Introduce 'clk_round_rate_nearest()'
Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 13:22:32 +0200
Message-ID: <9956925.Qsz2bH3rDg@vostro.rjw.lan>
User-Agent: KMail/4.11.5 (Linux/3.15.0-rc5+; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <CAKohpomb+h6ZNDgJ8AwJ_J9DjMB7AP_v-cp8coG3CACo5Wt4vQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20140521073457.GD31687@pengutronix.de> <00f65d1c-a375-40e7-b30a-cd8cb3ca87fc@BN1BFFO11FD020.protection.gbl> <CAKohpomb+h6ZNDgJ8AwJ_J9DjMB7AP_v-cp8coG3CACo5Wt4vQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Monday, May 26, 2014 11:59:09 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 23 May 2014 21:44, Sören Brinkmann <soren.brinkmann@xilinx.com> wrote:
> > Viresh: Could you imagine something similar for cpufreq? You suggested
> > migrating to Hz resolution. I guess that would ideally mean to follow
> > the CCF to a 64-bit type for frequencies and increasing the resolution.
> > I have a messy patch migrating cpufreq and OPP to Hz and unsigned long
> > that works on Zynq. But cpufreq has so many users that it would become
> > quite an undertaking.
> > And we'd need some new/amended OPP DT binding.
> 
> If we are going to migrate to Hz from KHz, I think we must consider the
> 64 bit stuff right now, otherwise it will bite us later.
> 
> @Rafael: What do you think?

I agree as far as the 64-bit thing goes, but is switching to Hz really
necessary?

Rafael