[PATCHv2] cpufreq for freescale mx51
yong.shen at linaro.org
Mon Oct 18 05:08:14 EDT 2010
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Sascha Hauer <s.hauer at pengutronix.de>wrote:
> Hi Yong,
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 01:43:43PM +0800, Yong Shen wrote:
> > Hi Sascha,
> > Thanks for your thorough review. I have two feedbacks to your commends.
> > Sorry for delayed response, cause I had a hard time due to my computer
> > and data loss.
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mx5/cpu.c b/arch/arm/mach-mx5/cpu.c
> > > > index 2d37785..83add9c 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-mx5/cpu.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-mx5/cpu.c
> > > > @@ -22,6 +22,8 @@ static int cpu_silicon_rev = -1;
> > > >
> > > > #define SI_REV 0x48
> > > >
> > > > +struct cpu_wp *(*get_cpu_wp)(int *wp);
> > > > +
> > >
> > > This is not needed.
> > >
> > This is needed, otherwise it does not pass compile.
> This hunk is the only change to arch/arm/mach-mx5/cpu.c and get_cpu_wp
> is introduced with this patch, so how can this break compilation?
> Also, you should move this to a header file. Otherwise you risk of
> having multiple (and possibly different) declarations of the same
> function which can lead to hard to find bugs.
IMHO, get_cpu_wp is definition rather than a declaration and without it
there will be errors in link phase. its declaration is in
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the linux-arm-kernel