From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Viresh Kumar Subject: Re: [PATCH] blackfin-cpufreq: Change return type of cpu_set_cclk() to that of clk_set_rate() Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 08:47:57 +0530 Message-ID: <20151221031757.GA5532@ubuntu> References: <5674598B.6020000@users.sourceforge.net> <20151219015926.GJ3946@ubuntu> <5675141F.2090803@users.sourceforge.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f48.google.com ([209.85.220.48]:35622 "EHLO mail-pa0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751145AbbLUDSB (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Dec 2015 22:18:01 -0500 Received: by mail-pa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id jx14so63315158pad.2 for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 19:18:01 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5675141F.2090803@users.sourceforge.net> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: SF Markus Elfring Cc: LKML , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Julia Lawall On 19-12-15, 09:23, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > >> From: Markus Elfring > >> Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 19:43:27 +0100 > >> > >> The return type "unsigned long" was used by the cpu_set_cclk() function > >> while the type "int" is provided by the clk_set_rate() function. > >> Let us make this usage consistent. > >> > >> This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring > >> --- > >> drivers/cpufreq/blackfin-cpufreq.c | 2 +- > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/blackfin-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/blackfin-cpufreq.c > >> index a9f8e5b..2a6f3ac 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/blackfin-cpufreq.c > >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/blackfin-cpufreq.c > >> @@ -112,7 +112,7 @@ static unsigned int bfin_getfreq_khz(unsigned int cpu) > >> } > >> > >> #ifdef CONFIG_BF60x > >> -unsigned long cpu_set_cclk(int cpu, unsigned long new) > >> +int cpu_set_cclk(int cpu, unsigned long new) > >> { > >> struct clk *clk; > > > > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar > > Thanks for your acceptance. > > I would appreciate if another implementation detail can also be clarified there. > http://lxr.free-electrons.com/ident?v=4.3;i=cpu_set_cclk > > * Do you want to reuse such a function in other modules? > * Should it eventually marked as "static"? This should be static, yeah. -- viresh