On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 09:41:27AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 17-12-24, 21:10, Beata Michalska wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 09:57:26AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > On 16-12-24, 23:15, Beata Michalska wrote: > > > > My bad as I must have misinterpreted that message. Although I am not entirely > > > > sure why this might be unacceptable as it is not such uncommon approach to use > > > > signed int space to cover both: expected positive value as well as potential > > > > error code case failure. > > > > > > This part is fine. The problem is with handling frequency here. Signed int can > > > capture up to 2 GHz of freq, where as unsigned int can capture up to 4 GHz and > > > so we would really like to keep it at 4 GHz.. > > Right, though the arch_freq_get_on_cpu operates on kHz values. > > Hmm.. Missed that. > > If you still want to keep it, make that change in a separate patch and > the new sysfs entry in a different one, so related people can easily > review. > Will do. Thank you for your feedback. Much appreciated. --- BR Beata > -- > viresh
