>> 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"? Regards, Markus -- 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