On 01/25/2011 09:05 AM, Vasiliy Kulikov wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 21:00 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
>> On Tue, 25 Jan 2011, Ryan Mallon wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/25/2011 08:55 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:
>>>> @@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ void __init at91_clock_associate(const char *id, struct device *dev, const char
>>>> {
>>>> struct clk *clk = clk_get(NULL, id);
>>>>
>>>> - if (!dev || !clk || !IS_ERR(clk_get(dev, func)))
>>>> + if (!dev || IS_ERR(clk) || !IS_ERR(clk_get(dev, func)))
>>>> return;
>>>
>>> I think we want:
>>>
>>> if (!dev || !clk || IS_ERR(clk) || !IS_ERR(clk_get(dev, func)))
>>> return;
>>>
>>> Since it is valid to return a NULL clk, and we don't want to try and
>>> dereference it if that is the case.
>>
>> Looking at the given defintion of clk_get, I can't see how that could
>> happen:
>
> clk_get() is defined per-architecture, sometimes it is NULL only.
Julia is correct. Some architectures can return NULL from clk_get, but I
didn't check the at91 before posting :-/. If we can't return NULL from
clk_get then we shouldn't bother checking for it. I do think we should
drop the !IS_ERR(clk_get(dev, func)) check though.
~Ryan
--
Bluewater Systems Ltd - ARM Technology Solution Centre
Ryan Mallon 5 Amuri Park, 404 Barbadoes St
ryan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx PO Box 13 889, Christchurch 8013
http://www.bluewatersys.com New Zealand
Phone: +64 3 3779127 Freecall: Australia 1800 148 751
Fax: +64 3 3779135 USA 1800 261 2934
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
