From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Timur Tabi Subject: Re: [PATCH V1] ASoC: fsl_ssi: refine ipg clock usage in this module Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 15:37:26 -0500 Message-ID: <540F6506.4060302@tabi.org> References: <20140909183804.GA6944@Asurada> <540F5706.1050303@tabi.org> <20140909195928.GA5224@Asurada> <540F5D29.7040309@tabi.org> <20140909202710.GB5224@Asurada> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from muin.pair.com (muin.pair.com [209.68.1.55]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C5BE2652F1 for ; Tue, 9 Sep 2014 22:37:28 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <20140909202710.GB5224@Asurada> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: Nicolin Chen Cc: Shengjiu Wang , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, tiwai@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, broonie@kernel.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com, Li.Xiubo@freescale.com, mpa@pengutronix.de, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On 09/09/2014 03:27 PM, Nicolin Chen wrote: > I guess Mark's comment is merely against the check for clk validation > because if talking about clk validation, we should check IS_ERR(clk) > rather than check !=NULL directly. Ah, that makes sense now. > However, my approach doesn't need any check. The open() or pm_resume() > can just call clk_prepare_enable() directly. The __clk_enable() will > then handle the 'clk == NULL' case: Yes, I was thinking the same thing. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from muin.pair.com (muin.pair.com [209.68.1.55]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C752C1A014D for ; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 06:37:29 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <540F6506.4060302@tabi.org> Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 15:37:26 -0500 From: Timur Tabi MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nicolin Chen Subject: Re: [PATCH V1] ASoC: fsl_ssi: refine ipg clock usage in this module References: <20140909183804.GA6944@Asurada> <540F5706.1050303@tabi.org> <20140909195928.GA5224@Asurada> <540F5D29.7040309@tabi.org> <20140909202710.GB5224@Asurada> In-Reply-To: <20140909202710.GB5224@Asurada> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Cc: Shengjiu Wang , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, tiwai@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, broonie@kernel.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com, perex@perex.cz, Li.Xiubo@freescale.com, mpa@pengutronix.de, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 09/09/2014 03:27 PM, Nicolin Chen wrote: > I guess Mark's comment is merely against the check for clk validation > because if talking about clk validation, we should check IS_ERR(clk) > rather than check !=NULL directly. Ah, that makes sense now. > However, my approach doesn't need any check. The open() or pm_resume() > can just call clk_prepare_enable() directly. The __clk_enable() will > then handle the 'clk == NULL' case: Yes, I was thinking the same thing. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752633AbaIIUhq (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Sep 2014 16:37:46 -0400 Received: from muin.pair.com ([209.68.1.55]:54920 "EHLO muin.pair.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752517AbaIIUh2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Sep 2014 16:37:28 -0400 Message-ID: <540F6506.4060302@tabi.org> Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 15:37:26 -0500 From: Timur Tabi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130329 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nicolin Chen CC: Shengjiu Wang , Li.Xiubo@freescale.com, lgirdwood@gmail.com, broonie@kernel.org, perex@perex.cz, tiwai@suse.de, alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mpa@pengutronix.de Subject: Re: [PATCH V1] ASoC: fsl_ssi: refine ipg clock usage in this module References: <20140909183804.GA6944@Asurada> <540F5706.1050303@tabi.org> <20140909195928.GA5224@Asurada> <540F5D29.7040309@tabi.org> <20140909202710.GB5224@Asurada> In-Reply-To: <20140909202710.GB5224@Asurada> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/09/2014 03:27 PM, Nicolin Chen wrote: > I guess Mark's comment is merely against the check for clk validation > because if talking about clk validation, we should check IS_ERR(clk) > rather than check !=NULL directly. Ah, that makes sense now. > However, my approach doesn't need any check. The open() or pm_resume() > can just call clk_prepare_enable() directly. The __clk_enable() will > then handle the 'clk == NULL' case: Yes, I was thinking the same thing.