From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: b-cousson@ti.com (Benoit Cousson) Date: Fri, 21 May 2010 12:41:24 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 10/22] OMAP: hwmod: Replace WARN by pr_warning for clockdomain check In-Reply-To: <4BF65F39.4090909@ru.mvista.com> References: <20100519021800.19716.8938.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <20100519021848.19716.50002.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <4BF65A27.9030603@ru.mvista.com> <4BF65F39.4090909@ru.mvista.com> Message-ID: <4BF66354.4060400@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 5/21/2010 12:23 PM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > Hello. > > I wrote: > >>> From: Benoit Cousson > >>> Most of the clock nodes belong to a clock domain, but it is perfectly >>> valid >>> to have clock without clock domain. >>> Root clocks for example does not belong to any clock domain. >>> Keep the warning but reduce the verbosity. > >>> Signed-off-by: Benoit Cousson >>> Signed-off-by: Paul Walmsley >> [...] >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c >>> b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c >>> index b6031e4..2fff39f 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c >>> @@ -404,21 +404,20 @@ static int _del_initiator_dep(struct omap_hwmod >>> *oh, struct omap_hwmod *init_oh) >>> */ >>> static int _init_main_clk(struct omap_hwmod *oh) >>> { >>> - struct clk *c; >>> int ret = 0; >>> >>> if (!oh->main_clk) >>> return 0; >>> >>> - c = omap_clk_get_by_name(oh->main_clk); >>> - if (!c) >>> + oh->_clk = omap_clk_get_by_name(oh->main_clk); >>> + if (!oh->_clk) >>> pr_warning("omap_hwmod: %s: cannot clk_get main_clk %s\n", >>> oh->name, oh->main_clk); >>> - ret = -EINVAL; >>> - oh->_clk = c; >>> + return -EINVAL; > >> Don't you need {} here again? > > Looks like the original file misses them too, so it needs fixing in > a separate patch perhaps... You're right, the original-original was fine, I messed up this one during the replacement of WARM ([PATCH 07/22] OMAP: hwmod: Replace WARN by pr_warning if clock lookup failed) you commented previously. Thanks, Benoit