On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 12:23:19PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 10-10-24, 13:08, Beata Michalska wrote: > > That is a fair point but I am not entirely convinced using '0' instead makes > > things any more clearer as this is in no way a valid CPU frequency. > > As long as we document the expected behaviour keeping the interface well > > defined, both options should be fine I guess. > > > > @Viresh: what is your opinion on that one ? > > Failing to get frequency for the CPU shouldn't be represented by 0, > even if it is confusing for the user. We still need to decide whether provide a more descriptive way of informing about such cases (whether it be 'unknown' or 'idle' ) or to simply return an appropriate error and leave the userspace with dealing with that. --- Thanks Beata > > -- > viresh
