Re: [PATCH] blackfin-cpufreq: Change return type of cpu_set_cclk() to that of clk_set_rate()

[Viresh Kumar]

On 19-12-15, 09:23, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 19:43:27 +0100
> >>
> >> The return type "unsigned long" was used by the cpu_set_cclk() function
> >> while the type "int" is provided by the clk_set_rate() function.
> >> Let us make this usage consistent.
> >>
> >> This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/cpufreq/blackfin-cpufreq.c | 2 +-
> >>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/blackfin-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/blackfin-cpufreq.c
> >> index a9f8e5b..2a6f3ac 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/blackfin-cpufreq.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/blackfin-cpufreq.c
> >> @@ -112,7 +112,7 @@ static unsigned int bfin_getfreq_khz(unsigned int cpu)
> >>  }
> >>  
> >>  #ifdef CONFIG_BF60x
> >> -unsigned long cpu_set_cclk(int cpu, unsigned long new)
> >> +int cpu_set_cclk(int cpu, unsigned long new)
> >>  {
> >>  	struct clk *clk;
> > 
> > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Thanks for your acceptance.
> 
> I would appreciate if another implementation detail can also be clarified there.
> http://lxr.free-electrons.com/ident?v=4.3;i=cpu_set_cclk
> 
> * Do you want to reuse such a function in other modules?
> * Should it eventually marked as "static"?

This should be static, yeah.

-- 
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/