On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 09:16:08AM +0000, Adam Thomson wrote:
On 27 April 2019 18:20, Mark Brown wrote:
Don't we need to validate that the rounded rate is actually viable for the parameters we're trying to set here? If there's missing constraints causing something to try to do something unsupportable then we should return an error rather than silently accept.
Thanks for directing my gaze to this again. Actually I don't think the SR should be rounded at all. If it doesn't match exactly it should fail so I'll remove the rounding here. Not sure what my brain was doing there.
Yeah, rounding is dubious with sample rate. Many applications will be able to tolerate *some* variation as there's tolerances in the crystals if nothing else but intentionally allowing it is a bit different.