On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 12:16:13PM +0200, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > Hi > > Am 23.09.22 um 11:18 schrieb Jani Nikula: > > On Fri, 23 Sep 2022, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Am 22.09.22 um 16:25 schrieb Maxime Ripard: > > > > + drm_dbg_kms(dev, > > > > + "Generating a %ux%u%c, %u-line mode with a %lu kHz clock\n", > > > > + hactive, vactive, > > > > + interlace ? 'i' : 'p', > > > > + params->num_lines, > > > > + pixel_clock_hz / 1000); > > > > > > Divide by HZ_PER_KHZ here and in other places. > > > > > > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/include/linux/units.h#L23 > > > > From the Department of Bikeshedding: > > > > I find "pixel_clock_hz / 1000" has much more clarity than > > "pixel_clock_hz / HZ_PER_KHZ". > > This one's easy to see because it tells you with the _hz postfix. Many > places don't and then it quickly gets confusing what units the code's > converting. So if I add it to places that don't have it explicitly (ie, tests) would that be acceptable to both of you? Maxime
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
