From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53244C433E1 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 11:36:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C1D920724 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 11:36:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="HyMlCpMD" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732547AbgFWLgt (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jun 2020 07:36:49 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55808 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732519AbgFWLgD (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jun 2020 07:36:03 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-x843.google.com (mail-qt1-x843.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::843]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BC2FC061755; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 04:36:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt1-x843.google.com with SMTP id v19so12605407qtq.10; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 04:36:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=4pFgJBI5OCUGefSIcYA75cTva8JFYmUiXoqYx+WyG9c=; b=HyMlCpMDocjfKKBdCi+o40gBFKbEJLUZrOAhvFFx4oLGKFgYQ+huI9As79YT6CAjOa z2C/Xdl9JZ0KjIxf0z+fW6ABlByiQ5bya+k/eGUH/aF4IHdwR1bTNNip68uuIJe7WlpH YMSHIlyZqfTwCdwD010jH6B7e3ALpCGY4ELBk3/yM9GQQH47+gIQ0ImwuYYE2D+5Njhv 0ym+2XuFqxH3sJwOokUV7b1thTP7Nbqy0B6kLt7X61WBzB3zDn8HOkMNTidrlrHhGmhe bjqpiyKJ8IZ+hJ6oXMGZZc8CVPLZSl1qwaaUZry6fOksDMILHtAjkq1qVnFnpIWu5FzY mlBw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4pFgJBI5OCUGefSIcYA75cTva8JFYmUiXoqYx+WyG9c=; b=VM/NwN4AjO/jRBqmMrnh+5Akp5DW/K0KK08PDJIe5B9MhPPkHZ7YKqxt/ebFqXzyoj rCa1hWoGkfyPQdeRtkfULdMndjIZ3f3fxM9RbzbT6eQbEiqIrg71qNY0F7IYs6GQtssi KTQ3gUROZI4VwSwsD74VXCJtVjTXMUyCf443lO5WMTXQ9mEThPk+dQlf97seqWNwoRZ7 zMVJRa2DtIPUCb3/jwRMoSI4ANyuCh2I8wgEQ6H876RD2uoRB019YEysqaCmQt70VRKu dovMGA8NL89+fgF3qqwUBvN1aQpmpk6xSY3yqrVHvm5/dNXnd4euAnBcov/x0GwPOBrx p1XQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532xW/anfwfuvWHxH6Ah1qx59UV3QMeZfpYT3/fg18YipiVNIP1U xC9TRL9P9a4li/EPFUkdsxuEnk/9SAnN8NYOOww= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxO61T03lcfmOJXo9ryxEyKF6k7r6xNQ5tVWce+sBxYQ2LVJuylLY2ZNsYXy4zLvna194XXAG3+GxjVNzCv12s= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:41c6:: with SMTP id o6mr15036092qtm.292.1592912162502; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 04:36:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <39ac8f24-3148-2a3d-3f8d-91567b3c4c9e@web.de> <24be48d2-63de-b900-cec7-d21e83a89ca2@web.de> In-Reply-To: <24be48d2-63de-b900-cec7-d21e83a89ca2@web.de> From: Shengjiu Wang Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2020 19:35:51 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] ASoC: fsl_mqs: Don't check clock is NULL before calling clk API To: Markus Elfring Cc: Linux-ALSA , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Shengjiu Wang , Xiubo Li , Timur Tabi , Takashi Iwai , Nicolin Chen , Mark Brown , Fabio Estevam , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 4:55 PM Markus Elfring wrote: > > > clk_prepare_enable and clk_disable_unprepare check the input > > clock parameter in the beginning of the function, > > These functions call further functions which perform null pointer checks. > > > > if the parameter > > is NULL, clk_prepare_enable and clk_disable_unprepare will > > return immediately. > > The interpretation of these function implementations seems to be reasonable. > Would you like to achieve any improvements for the corresponding software documentation? Which document do you mean? > > > > So Don't need to check input clock parameters before calling clk API. > > What do you find imperative in this wording? > > Another wording alternative: > Thus omit extra null pointer checks before four function calls. > > Regards, > Markus