On 2011-02-18 at 09:08:53 +0100, Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Thomas Chou <thomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 02/17/2011 03:48 PM, Tobias Klauser wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> + ret = altera_uart_get_of_uartclk(pdev, port);
> >>>> + if (ret&& platp)
> >>>> + port->uartclk = platp->uartclk;
> >>>> + else if (ret)
> >>>> + return ret;
> >>>> +
> >>>
> >>> Better reverse the priority, with platform data checked first.
> >>>
> >>> if (platp)
> >>> port->uartclk = platp->uartclk;
> >>> else {
> >>> ret = altera_uart_get_of_uartclk(pdev, port);
> >>> if (ret)
> >>> return ret;
> >>> }
> >>
> >> Do you have a specific reasoning for this? I thought it might make sense
> >> to do it in the same order as with the resources above, but I have no
> >> problem changing it to the way you suggest.
> >
> > Not quite sure. But I see some drivers follow this order, and I just
> > followed, too.
>
> The reason to check for platform_data first is that if a device has
> *both* platform data and a device node pointer, then more than likely
> the platform_data is indented to override the device node data.
Thanks Grant and Thomas for the explanation. I was just wondering. I'll
send an updated patch including the changes suggested by Thomas.
Tobias
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
