linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v3 2/2] at91: add Atmel ISI and ov2640 support on sam9m10/sam9g45 board.

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1109261318501.9168@axis700.grange>
Date:	Mon, 26 Sep 2011 13:21:17 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>
To:	"Wu, Josh" <Josh.wu@...el.com>
cc:	Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, s.nawrocki@...sung.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
	"Ferre, Nicolas" <Nicolas.FERRE@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 2/2] at91: add Atmel ISI and ov2640 support on
 sam9m10/sam9g45 board.

On Mon, 26 Sep 2011, Wu, Josh wrote:

> On Thu, 22 Sep 2011, Guennadi wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 22 Sep 2011, Josh Wu wrote:

[snip]

> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9g45.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9g45.c
> >> index e04c5fb..5e23d6d 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9g45.c
> >> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9g45.c
> >> @@ -201,6 +201,7 @@ static struct clk *periph_clocks[] __initdata = {
> >>  	// irq0
> >>  };
> >>  
> >> +static struct clk pck1;
> 
> > Hm, it really doesn't need any initialisation, not even for the .type 
> > field? .type=0 doesn't seem to be valid.
> 
> This line is only a forward declaration. Since the real definition is behind the code we use it.
> It defined in later lines:
> 
> static struct clk pck1 = {
>          .name           = "pck1",
>          .pmc_mask       = AT91_PMC_PCK1,
>          .type           = CLK_TYPE_PROGRAMMABLE,
>          .id             = 1,
> };

Ehem, yes, that's why I'm not very fond of forward declarations of 
structs... Without looking at the code - would it be possible to swap the 
order while still preserving clean source-code structure?

Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/