On 04/14, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > OK, now I notice another problem in my code; > if foo_clk_init() fails for reason [2], > clk_disable() WARN's due to zero enable_count. > > if (WARN_ON(core->enable_count == 0)) > return; > > > > Perhaps, I got screwed up by splitting clock init stuff > into a helper function. Yep! Can't we just split the enable/disable out into another function separate from the clk_get/put part? That would make things more symmetric and avoid this problem. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
