Russell King wrote: > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 07:13:28PM +0900, Kyoungil Kim wrote: > > port->baudclk_rate should be compared to the rate of port->baudclk, > > because port->baudclk_rate was assigned as the rate of port->baudclk previously. > > So to check that the current baudclk rate is same as previous rate, > > the target of comparison sholud be the rate of port->baudclk. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jun-Ho, Yoon <junho78.yoon@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Kyoungil Kim <ki0351.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/tty/serial/samsung.c | 4 ++-- > > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/samsung.c b/drivers/tty/serial/samsung.c > > index d8b0aee..c4867ea 100644 > > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/samsung.c > > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/samsung.c > > @@ -1014,10 +1014,10 @@ static int s3c24xx_serial_cpufreq_transition(struct notifier_block *nb, > > * a disturbance in the clock-rate over the change. > > */ > > > > - if (IS_ERR(port->clk)) > > + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(port->baudclk)) > > NAK. See my previous emails on the validity of clk_get() return values. I read your previous emails, but I don't understand. Could you explain more details, please? -- 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
