On 5/11/2012 8:41 AM, Michael Hennerich wrote:
On 05/10/2012 02:36 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
On 5/8/2012 4:34 PM, Michael Hennerich wrote:
On 05/08/2012 04:51 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
On 5/7/2012 2:49 PM, michael.hennerich@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Michael Hennerich<michael.hennerich@xxxxxxxxxx>
+
+static const struct iio_chan_spec_ext_info adf4350_ext_info[] = {
+ /* Ideally we use IIO_CHAN_INFO_FREQUENCY, but there are
+ * values> 2^32 in order to support the entire frequency range
+ * in Hz. Using scale is a bit ugly.
+ */
hmm.. Add IIO_VAL_MEGA_PLUS_INT.. We were always going to need a bigger
version at somepoint...
Well - we then need an s64, however read|write_raw feature s32 for
val and val2. So shall we pass low word in val and high word in val2?
I was thinking
val*1e6 + val2 would fit with what we have done elsewhere? Is that
enough room?
Hi Jonathan,
IIO_VAL_MEGA_PLUS_INT versus IIO_VAL_LONG_LONG
It is enough room. But I wonder why we would do costly divide and
modulus operations, when we can do sifts and ANDs? Splitting a s64 would
give is the maximum available room with very little overhead.
human readability. I'm anti breaking that if we can possibly avoid it.
Thoughts?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
