On 08-07-15, 15:41, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Isn't using u32 for storing frequency (in Hz) too small by today's standards?
[ Please note that the old v1 binding uses kHz not Hz. ]
I have thought about this a bit more and I am somewhat confused. Yes I agree that u32 isn't big enough for frequencies in Hz, i.e. Max value of 4294967295 ~ 4.29 GHz.
But the bigger problem lies with the clk API that we have today. It declares clk-rate as a unsigned-long which is 32 bits on a 32 bit machine and 64 bits on a 64 bit machine. And every single piece of code reading "clock-frequency" DT property, reads it as a 32 bit value as we reserve only a single cell for it.
Now, if we wanna change that, we need to start changing from the clk-API itself and that's not gonna be a small task and I would leave it to Mike/Stephen for obvious reasons :)
So, I will keep this code in sync with rest of the kernel and lets see what Mike has to say.