lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Dec]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Inconsistency in clk framework
From
Date
On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 06:34 +1300, Tony Prisk wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-12-19 at 09:26 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 05:10:33PM +1300, Tony Prisk wrote:
> > > Hi Mike,
> > >
> > > In attempting to remove some IS_ERR_OR_NULL references, it was pointed
> > > out that clk_get() can return NULL if CONFIG_HAVE_CLK is not defined.
> >
> > That is correct - but why is that a problem? As far as users are
> > concerned, NULL is a valid clock. If HAVE_CLK is undefined, do you
> > want all your drivers to suddenly stop working?
>
> That will be where the misunderstanding has occurred - I didn't consider
> NULL to be a valid clock.
>
> Given that NULL is a valid clock, I guess all tests against get_clk and
> of_get_clk results should be IS_ERR_OR_NULL. Correct?
>
For the sake of clarity, I should rephrase:

If the driver can't operate with a NULL clk, it should use a
IS_ERR_OR_NULL test to test for failure, rather than IS_ERR.

Regards
Tony P



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-12-19 20:21    [W:0.049 / U:1.168 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site