[media] zl10353: use div_u64 instead of do_div

Using div_u64() instead of do_div() makes the code slightly more
readable by humans.

[mchehab@osg.samsung.org: originally, this patch was proposed as a bug
 fix for a gcc bug. This was solved already, but it is still better to
 use div_u64, instead of do_div, so I'm applying it, removing the
 comments about the gcc bug]
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@osg.samsung.com>
This commit is contained in:
Arnd Bergmann 2016-02-12 12:27:18 -02:00 committed by Mauro Carvalho Chehab
parent 68af062b5f
commit 8a73faab0a
1 changed files with 2 additions and 4 deletions

View File

@ -135,8 +135,7 @@ static void zl10353_calc_nominal_rate(struct dvb_frontend *fe,
value = (u64)10 * (1 << 23) / 7 * 125;
value = (bw * value) + adc_clock / 2;
do_div(value, adc_clock);
*nominal_rate = value;
*nominal_rate = div_u64(value, adc_clock);
dprintk("%s: bw %d, adc_clock %d => 0x%x\n",
__func__, bw, adc_clock, *nominal_rate);
@ -163,8 +162,7 @@ static void zl10353_calc_input_freq(struct dvb_frontend *fe,
if (ife > adc_clock / 2)
ife = adc_clock - ife;
}
value = (u64)65536 * ife + adc_clock / 2;
do_div(value, adc_clock);
value = div_u64((u64)65536 * ife + adc_clock / 2, adc_clock);
*input_freq = -value;
dprintk("%s: if2 %d, ife %d, adc_clock %d => %d / 0x%x\n",