From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: mingo@kernel.org (Ingo Molnar)
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 17:49:45 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 01/11] clocksource: arm_arch_timer: Rename
 arch_timer_probed to reflect behaviour
In-Reply-To: <15031814.pvNHsWnCPH@avalon>
References: <5519AEB2.8050306@linaro.org>
 <1427746633-9137-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
 <20150331071452.GA9252@gmail.com> <15031814.pvNHsWnCPH@avalon>
Message-ID: <20150331154945.GA27058@gmail.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org


* Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> wrote:

> Hi Ingo,
> 
> On Tuesday 31 March 2015 09:14:52 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com>
> > > 
> > > The arch_timer_probed function returns whether the given time doesn't
> > > need to be probed. This can be the case when the timer has been probed
> > > already, but also when it has no corresponding enabled node in DT.
> > > 
> > > Rename the function to arch_timer_need_probe and invert its return value
> > > to better reflect the function's purpose and behaviour.
> > > 
> > > Acked-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart
> > > <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
> > > ---
> > > 
> > >  drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c | 13 +++++++------
> > >  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> > > b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c index a3025e7..50bb7f2 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> > > @@ -661,17 +661,17 @@ static const struct of_device_id
> > > arch_timer_mem_of_match[] __initconst = {> 
> > >  };
> > >  
> > >  static bool __init
> > > 
> > > -arch_timer_probed(int type, const struct of_device_id *matches)
> > > +arch_timer_need_probe(int type, const struct of_device_id *matches)
> > 
> > If we do a rename we might as well use valid English spelling such as
> > 'arch_timer_needs_probing()'?
> 
> Of course. Should I resend the patch or can you fix that while applying it ?

No need to resend, I've done the rename in the patch.

Thanks,

	Ingo