From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751833Ab1AXU20 (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jan 2011 15:28:26 -0500 Received: from mgw2.diku.dk ([130.225.96.92]:43133 "EHLO mgw2.diku.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751571Ab1AXU2Y (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jan 2011 15:28:24 -0500 Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 21:28:17 +0100 (CET) From: Julia Lawall To: Ryan Mallon Cc: Vasiliy Kulikov , Russell King , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Nicolas Ferre , Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD , Andrew Victor , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] arch/arm/mach-at91/clock.c: Add missing IS_ERR test In-Reply-To: <4D3DDD07.1030809@bluewatersys.com> Message-ID: References: <1295898922-18822-1-git-send-email-julia@diku.dk> <1295898922-18822-3-git-send-email-julia@diku.dk> <4D3DD964.9020107@bluewatersys.com> <20110124200515.GA30963@albatros> <4D3DDD07.1030809@bluewatersys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Julia is correct. Some architectures can return NULL from clk_get, but I > didn't check the at91 before posting :-/. If we can't return NULL from > clk_get then we shouldn't bother checking for it. I do think we should > drop the !IS_ERR(clk_get(dev, func)) check though. It seems a bit subtle, because the clk manipulated by clk_get in the call of clk_get(dev, func) is not necessarily the same as the one in clock_associate. But perhaps this is the only possibility in practice? julia