linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] media: i2c: vd55g1: Fix RATE macros not being expressed in bps

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <e080a28c-9ec7-46bd-8bcd-49b48bd9ab94@foss.st.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 11:31:09 +0200
From: Benjamin Mugnier <benjamin.mugnier@...s.st.com>
To: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
CC: Sylvain Petinot <sylvain.petinot@...s.st.com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab
	<mchehab@...nel.org>,
        <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] media: i2c: vd55g1: Fix RATE macros not being
 expressed in bps

On 6/10/25 11:01, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2025 at 03:46:21PM +0200, Benjamin Mugnier wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Mugnier <benjamin.mugnier@...s.st.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/media/i2c/vd55g1.c | 4 ++--
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/vd55g1.c b/drivers/media/i2c/vd55g1.c
>> index 25e2fc88a0367bf6a28bb22d209323ace99299f2..78dd22d9cab03edf4ff3e5a301f8d045e930c997 100644
>> --- a/drivers/media/i2c/vd55g1.c
>> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/vd55g1.c
>> @@ -129,8 +129,8 @@
>>  #define VD55G1_FWPATCH_REVISION_MINOR			9
>>  #define VD55G1_XCLK_FREQ_MIN				(6 * HZ_PER_MHZ)
>>  #define VD55G1_XCLK_FREQ_MAX				(27 * HZ_PER_MHZ)
>> -#define VD55G1_MIPI_RATE_MIN				(250 * HZ_PER_MHZ)
>> -#define VD55G1_MIPI_RATE_MAX				(1200 * HZ_PER_MHZ)
>> +#define VD55G1_MIPI_RATE_MIN				(250 * MEGA)
>> +#define VD55G1_MIPI_RATE_MAX				(1200 * MEGA)
> 
> As the meaning of Hz is just /s, I don't think the use of HZ_PER_MHZ was
> wrong in any way above.
> 

Should I just drop this patch then ?

-- 
Regards,
Benjamin