[PATCH 10/10] ARM: msm: Migrate to common clock framework
Pankaj Jangra
jangra.pankaj9 at gmail.com
Wed Sep 26 14:57:51 EDT 2012
Hi,
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 12:20 AM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd at codeaurora.org> wrote:
> On 09/26/12 11:47, Pankaj Jangra wrote:
>> Hi Stephen,
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 7:56 AM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd at codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>
>>> -static int pc_clk_set_rate(unsigned id, unsigned rate)
>>> +static int pc_clk_set_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long new_rate,
>>> + unsigned long p_rate)
>>> {
>>> - /* The rate _might_ be rounded off to the nearest KHz value by the
>>> + struct clk_pcom *p = to_clk_pcom(hw);
>>> + unsigned id = p->id, rate = new_rate;
>>> + int rc;
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * The rate _might_ be rounded off to the nearest KHz value by the
>>> * remote function. So a return value of 0 doesn't necessarily mean
>>> * that the exact rate was set successfully.
>>> */
>>> - int rc = msm_proc_comm(PCOM_CLKCTL_RPC_SET_RATE, &id, &rate);
>>> - if (rc < 0)
>>> - return rc;
>>> - else
>>> - return (int)id < 0 ? -EINVAL : 0;
>>> -}
>>> -
>>> -static int pc_clk_set_min_rate(unsigned id, unsigned rate)
>>> -{
>>> - int rc = msm_proc_comm(PCOM_CLKCTL_RPC_MIN_RATE, &id, &rate);
>>> - if (rc < 0)
>>> - return rc;
>>> + if (p->flags & CLKFLAG_MIN)
>>> + rc = msm_proc_comm(PCOM_CLKCTL_RPC_MIN_RATE, &id, &rate);
>> You are missing if condition here checking the rc ?
>>
>>> else
>>> - return (int)id < 0 ? -EINVAL : 0;
>>> -}
>>> -
>>> -static int pc_clk_set_max_rate(unsigned id, unsigned rate)
>>> -{
>>> - int rc = msm_proc_comm(PCOM_CLKCTL_RPC_MAX_RATE, &id, &rate);
>> and else here i think for the MIN_FLAG if check.
>>
>>> + rc = msm_proc_comm(PCOM_CLKCTL_RPC_SET_RATE, &id, &rate);
>>> if (rc < 0)
>>> return rc;
>>> else
>>> return (int)id < 0 ? -EINVAL : 0;
>>> }
>
> This is the resulting code:
>
> if (p->flags & CLKFLAG_MIN)
> rc = msm_proc_comm(PCOM_CLKCTL_RPC_MIN_RATE, &id, &rate);
> else
> rc = msm_proc_comm(PCOM_CLKCTL_RPC_SET_RATE, &id, &rate);
> if (rc < 0)
> return rc;
> else
> return (int)id < 0 ? -EINVAL : 0;
>
> So we check the rc for both cases in the same if condition. Is there
> anything wrong?
My mistake. I overlooked a line. Sorry for spam. Thanks
--
Pankaj Jangra
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list