On 09/25/2013 12:12 AM, Andrew Bresticker wrote:
+static int exynos_audss_clk_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) +{ + int i; + + of_clk_del_provider(pdev->dev.of_node); + + for (i = 0; i< EXYNOS_AUDSS_MAX_CLKS; i++) { + if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(clk_table[i])) + clk_unregister(clk_table[i]); + }Since we only get here if all the clocks are registered properly and we always register EXYNOS_AUDSS_MAX_CLKS clocks, couldn't this simply be: for (i = 0; i< EXYNOS_AUDSS_MAX_CLKS; i++) clk_unregister(clk_table[i]); ?Once support is added for Exynos5420, we won't always register EXYNOS_AUDSS_MAX_CLKS clocks, so we'd still need the NULL check.
Then couldn't you use clk_data.clk_num in this loop instead of EXYNOS_AUDSS_MAX_CLKS ? What I'm trying to avoid is assuming NULL as an invalid clock. It's not correct, clock pointers should be only tested with ERR_PTR(). Alternatively you could set the whole clk_table array to, e.g. ERR_PTR(-EINVAL) beforehand, but that shouldn't be necessary when clk_data.clk_num is used, unless there are holes in the array. -- Regards, Sylwester -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
