Re: [PATCH v2] cpufreq: imx: update the clock switch flow to support imx6ul

[Bai Ping <b51503@freescale.com>]

On 2015/9/11 16:07, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 11-09-15, 23:41, Bai Ping wrote:
>> +	if (of_machine_is_compatible("fsl,imx6ul")) {
>> +		pll2_bus_clk = clk_get(cpu_dev, "pll2_bus");
>> +		secondary_sel_clk = clk_get(cpu_dev, "secondary_sel");
>> +		if (IS_ERR(pll2_bus_clk) || IS_ERR(secondary_sel_clk)) {
>> +			dev_err(cpu_dev, "failed to get clocks specific to imx6ul\n");
>> +			ret = -ENOENT;
>> +			goto put_clk;
>> +		}
>> +	}
>> +
>>   	arm_reg = regulator_get(cpu_dev, "arm");
>>   	pu_reg = regulator_get_optional(cpu_dev, "pu");
>>   	soc_reg = regulator_get(cpu_dev, "soc");
>> @@ -331,6 +365,10 @@ put_clk:
>>   		clk_put(step_clk);
>>   	if (!IS_ERR(pll2_pfd2_396m_clk))
>>   		clk_put(pll2_pfd2_396m_clk);
>> +	if (!IS_ERR(pll2_bus_clk))
>> +		clk_put(pll2_bus_clk);
>> +	if (!IS_ERR(secondary_sel_clk))
>> +		clk_put(secondary_sel_clk);
>>   	of_node_put(np);
>>   	return ret;
>>   }
> As part of good coding practices, you should free resources in the
> reverse order to which they were allocated. The clocks don't follow
> that, but its not a problem with just your patch. That's how it is
> present today. Maybe you can write another patch to fix that.

thanks for your suggestion, I will pay more attention to it in future 
coding.

> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
>