On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 12:54:15PM -0700, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Aug 2015, walter harms wrote:
> > Am 30.08.2015 20:05, schrieb Julia Lawall:
> > > if (IS_ERR(drvdata->mi2s_bit_clk[dai_id])) {
> > > dev_err(&pdev->dev,
> > > "%s() error getting mi2s-bit-clk: %ld\n",
> > > - __func__,
> PTR_ERR(drvdata->mi2s_bit_clk[i]));
> > > + __func__,
> > > + PTR_ERR(drvdata->mi2s_bit_clk[dai_id]));
> > > return PTR_ERR(drvdata->mi2s_bit_clk[dai_id]);
> > > }
> > > }
> > >
> >
> > just a note:
> > using a shorter name instead of drvdata->mi2s_bit_clk[dai_id] whould
> help to make the code
> > more readable (yes, the other code is alike). something like:
> >
> > struct clk *tmp = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev,clk_name);
>
> Where do you suggest to put this?
>
> Maybe it would be reasonable to declare a variable struct clk *clk; at the
>
> top of the function, and then use that as a temporary variable for all
> three calls.
>
> However, now I see that the first call, unlike the other two doesn't cause
>
> a return from the function.
>
> if (IS_ERR(drvdata->mi2s_osr_clk[dai_id])) {
> dev_warn(&pdev->dev,
> "%s() error getting mi2s-osr-clk: %ld\n",
> __func__,
> PTR_ERR(drvdata->mi2s_osr_clk[dai_id]));
> }
>
> Is that intentional?
Yes, that was intentional as the presense of the OSR clock in the DT
node is optional.
--
Kenneth Westfield
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
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
