[PATCH] serial: samsung: Fixed wrong comparison for baudclk_rate

[Russell King - ARM Linux]

On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 08:52:39PM +0900, Kyoungil Kim wrote:
> Russell King wrote:
> > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 07:13:28PM +0900, Kyoungil Kim wrote:
> > > port->baudclk_rate should be compared to the rate of port->baudclk,
> > > because port->baudclk_rate was assigned as the rate of port->baudclk previously.
> > > So to check that the current baudclk rate is same as previous rate,
> > > the target of comparison sholud be the rate of port->baudclk.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jun-Ho, Yoon <junho78.yoon at samsung.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Kyoungil Kim <ki0351.kim at samsung.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/tty/serial/samsung.c |    4 ++--
> > >  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/samsung.c b/drivers/tty/serial/samsung.c
> > > index d8b0aee..c4867ea 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/samsung.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/samsung.c
> > > @@ -1014,10 +1014,10 @@ static int s3c24xx_serial_cpufreq_transition(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > >  	 * a disturbance in the clock-rate over the change.
> > >  	 */
> > >
> > > -	if (IS_ERR(port->clk))
> > > +	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(port->baudclk))
> > 
> > NAK.  See my previous emails on the validity of clk_get() return values.
> 
> I read your previous emails, but I don't understand.
> Could you explain more details, please?

Drivers are only allowed to assume that IS_ERR() values for clocks are
invalid.  Everything else they should not concern themselves with.