[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1610311137290.8160@nanos>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 11:39:32 -0600 (MDT)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Noam Camus <noamca@...lanox.com>
cc: robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] clocksource: update "fn" at CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE()
of nps400 timer
On Mon, 31 Oct 2016, Noam Camus wrote:
>
> static unsigned long nps_timer_rate;
> +static int nps_get_timer_clk(struct device_node *node,
Please don't glue variables and functions together w/o a new line. That's
horrible to read.
> +static int __init nps_setup_clocksource(struct device_node *node)
> {
> int ret, cluster;
> + struct clk *clk;
>
> for (cluster = 0; cluster < NPS_CLUSTER_NUM; cluster++)
> nps_msu_reg_low_addr[cluster] =
> nps_host_reg((cluster << NPS_CLUSTER_OFFSET),
> NPS_MSU_BLKID, NPS_MSU_TICK_LOW);
>
> - ret = clk_prepare_enable(clk);
> - if (ret) {
> - pr_err("Couldn't enable parent clock\n");
> - return ret;
> - }
> -
> - nps_timer_rate = clk_get_rate(clk);
> + nps_get_timer_clk(node, &nps_timer_rate, clk);
Why are you ignoring the return code? It was handled before your change ...
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists