Re: [PATCH 1/3] CLK: uninline clk_prepare() and clk_unprepare()

[Mike Turquette]

Quoting Viresh Kumar (2012-11-21 19:34:18)
> On 22 November 2012 02:13, Mike Turquette <mturquette@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > HAVE_CLK logically wraps HAVE_CLK_PREPARE.  There is no point in
> > selecting HAVE_CLK_PREPARE without HAVE_CLK.
> >
> > Looking through the code I see that this used to be the case.  Commit
> > 93abe8e "clk: add non CONFIG_HAVE_CLK routines" moved the
> > clk_(un)prepare declarations outside of #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_CLK.  That
> > commit was authored by you.  Can you elaborate on why that aspect of the
> > patch was needed?
> 
> Haha... Caught red handed :(
> 
> Before this commit, nothing was enclosed within CONFIG_HAVE_CLK and
> this patch only introduced it. I am not really sure, why i kept
> prepare/unprepare
> out of it though :(
> 
> Maybe because some platform at that time is using it directly, without
> CONFIG_HAVE_CLK. Not sure.
> 

No worries.  Looks like everything gets sorted out in the end ;)

Regards,
Mike

> --
> viresh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/