[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120424070426.GA24089@lunn.ch>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 09:04:26 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: viresh.kumar@...com
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux@....linux.org.uk,
sshtylyov@...sta.com, spear-devel@...t.st.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
viresh.linux@...il.com, mturquette@...aro.org, jgarzik@...hat.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH V2 4/9] ata/sata_mv: Remove conditional compilation of clk
code
Hi Viresh
> With addition of dummy clk_*() calls for non CONFIG_HAVE_CLK cases in clk.h,
> there is no need to have clk code enclosed in #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_CLK, #endif
> macros.
>
> ...
>
> -#if defined(CONFIG_HAVE_CLK)
> hpriv->clk = clk_get(&pdev->dev, NULL);
> if (IS_ERR(hpriv->clk))
> dev_notice(&pdev->dev, "cannot get clkdev\n");
> else
> clk_enable(hpriv->clk);
> -#endif
I don't think this change is correct. With the old semantics, it was:
If we have CLK support, we expect there to be a clock for sata_mv, and
if there is no such clock, output a notice message, something is
probably wrong, i expected there to be a clock.
The new semantics are:
We expect there to be a clock for sata_mv, and if there is no such
clock, output a notice message, something is probably wrong, i
expected there to be a clock.
We are going to see this notice message much more, when it is not
expected.
Andrew
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists