[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150331154945.GA27058@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 17:49:45 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Cc: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com, viresh.kumar@...aro.org,
ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk, digetx@...il.com, hdegoede@...hat.com,
laurent.pinchart+renesas@...asonboard.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] clocksource: arm_arch_timer: Rename
arch_timer_probed to reflect behaviour
* Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com> wrote:
> Hi Ingo,
>
> On Tuesday 31 March 2015 09:14:52 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org> wrote:
> > > From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@...asonboard.com>
> > >
> > > The arch_timer_probed function returns whether the given time doesn't
> > > need to be probed. This can be the case when the timer has been probed
> > > already, but also when it has no corresponding enabled node in DT.
> > >
> > > Rename the function to arch_timer_need_probe and invert its return value
> > > to better reflect the function's purpose and behaviour.
> > >
> > > Acked-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart
> > > <laurent.pinchart+renesas@...asonboard.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c | 13 +++++++------
> > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> > > b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c index a3025e7..50bb7f2 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> > > @@ -661,17 +661,17 @@ static const struct of_device_id
> > > arch_timer_mem_of_match[] __initconst = {>
> > > };
> > >
> > > static bool __init
> > >
> > > -arch_timer_probed(int type, const struct of_device_id *matches)
> > > +arch_timer_need_probe(int type, const struct of_device_id *matches)
> >
> > If we do a rename we might as well use valid English spelling such as
> > 'arch_timer_needs_probing()'?
>
> Of course. Should I resend the patch or can you fix that while applying it ?
No need to resend, I've done the rename in the patch.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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