On Mon, Mar 4, 2024, at 12:24, Andre Przywara wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Mar 2024 12:11:36 +0100 "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> This used to be a 32-bit division. If the rate is never more than
>> 4.2GHz, clock could be turned back into 'unsigned long' to avoid
>> the expensive div_u64().
>
> Wouldn't "div_u64(clock, 200)" solve this problem?
Yes, that's why I mentioned it as the worse of the two obvious
solutions. ;-)
Arnd
