From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nishanth Menon Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] omap: opp: add OMAP3 OPP table data and common init Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 08:02:53 -0600 Message-ID: <4CE28F0D.6030205@ti.com> References: <[PATCH 0/3 v2] omap: opp: Add opp data> <1289849261-29767-2-git-send-email-nm@ti.com> <20101116122128.5c6cc050@surf> <4CE2710A.3010804@ti.com> <20101116134220.1bb818c0@surf> <4CE282CC.6070105@ti.com> <20101116142026.4f4740d2@surf> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from na3sys009aob110.obsmtp.com ([74.125.149.202]:58213 "EHLO na3sys009aob110.obsmtp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756474Ab0KPOC5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Nov 2010 09:02:57 -0500 Received: by gxk23 with SMTP id 23so329983gxk.33 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 06:02:56 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20101116142026.4f4740d2@surf> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Thomas Petazzoni Cc: linux-omap , Tony Thomas Petazzoni had written, on 11/16/2010 07:20 AM, the following: >>> would prevent you from having no OPP table (the case where a NULL OPP >>> table is passed is tested *before* in omapX_init_opp()). >> HUH?? NULL table to a static function - what code are you talking >> about?? why are you so behind BUG_ON, when there are valid reasons for >> reentry into code. > > In the current design, yes, there are indeed valid reasons for reentry > into the omapX_init_opp() function, and that's exactly the point I'm > critizicing here. how about: if (omap_table_init) return -EEXIST; does that make it better? it still retains the ability to handle both kinds of platforms as well as not BUG out. -- Regards, Nishanth Menon