Dear Måns Rullgård, In message <yw1x8uxc28y9....@unicorn.mansr.com> you wrote: > > >> Something like this should be equivalent. That said, it looks > >> suspiciously like it's meant to simply do a division and round up. If > >> that is the case, +225 should be +249. It probably makes no difference > >> for the values actually encountered. > > > > Umm... this is the part which I do not understand. > > > > The original code adds 90%; you add 90%, too. However, to round up, > > one usually adds only 50% ? > > Adding 50% would round to nearest. For integer division to round up, > you must add one less than the divisor.
Agreed. But do we want to round up? The original code used +90%, which is something else, too... > > Where are these 90% coming from? Are they in any way meaningful, or > > even critical? > > My guess is that it was someone's approximation of 249 / 250. I don't > know the hardware, so it's conceivable that it really should be this > way, although it seems unlikely. Are you able to test such a modificationon actual hardware? Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de "The X11 source code style is ATROCIOUS and should not be used as a model." - Doug Gwyn _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot