Le 03/05/2021 à 06:56, Rajan Vaja a écrit :
Hi,
Thanks for the patch.
-----Original Message-----
From: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 01 May 2021 04:55 PM
To: mturquette@xxxxxxxxxxxx; sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx; Michal Simek
<michals@xxxxxxxxxx>; quanyang.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Rajan Vaja
<RAJANV@xxxxxxxxxx>; Jolly Shah <JOLLYS@xxxxxxxxxx>; Tejas Patel
<tejasp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Shubhrajyoti Datta <shubhraj@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: linux-clk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; kernel-janitors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Christophe JAILLET
<christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [PATCH] clk: zynqmp: pll: Remove some dead code
'clk_hw_set_rate_range()' does not return any error code and 'ret' is
known to be 0 at this point, so this message can never be displayed.
Remove it.
Fixes: 3fde0e16d016 ("drivers: clk: Add ZynqMP clock driver")
Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
HOWEVER, the message is about 'clk_set_rate_range()', not
'clk_hw_set_rate_range()'. So the message is maybe correct and the
'xxx_rate_range()' function incorrect.
---
drivers/clk/zynqmp/pll.c | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/clk/zynqmp/pll.c b/drivers/clk/zynqmp/pll.c
index abe6afbf3407..af11e9400058 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/zynqmp/pll.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/zynqmp/pll.c
@@ -331,8 +331,6 @@ struct clk_hw *zynqmp_clk_register_pll(const char *name,
u32 clk_id,
}
clk_hw_set_rate_range(hw, PS_PLL_VCO_MIN, PS_PLL_VCO_MAX);
- if (ret < 0)
- pr_err("%s:ERROR clk_set_rate_range failed %d\n", name, ret);
[Rajan] Instead of removing, can we get return value of clk_hw_set_rate_range() and
print in case of an error.
Hi,
if it was possible, it is what I would have proposed because it looks
'logical'.
However, 'clk_hw_set_rate_range()' returns void.
Hence my comment about 'clk_hw_set_rate_range' being the correct
function to call or not. (i.e. is the comment right and
'clk_hw_set_rate_range' wrong?)
CJ
return hw;
}
--
2.30.2
