[PATCH] blackfin-cpufreq: Change return type of cpu_set_cclk() to that of clk_set_rate()

[PATCH] blackfin-cpufreq: Change return type of cpu_set_cclk() to that of clk_set_rate()

[SF Markus Elfring]

From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
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 <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
---
 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;
 	int ret;
-- 
2.6.3

Re: [PATCH] blackfin-cpufreq: Change return type of cpu_set_cclk() to that of clk_set_rate()

[Viresh Kumar]

On 18-12-15, 20:07, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
> 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 <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
> ---
>  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 <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

-- 
viresh

Re: [PATCH] blackfin-cpufreq: Change return type of cpu_set_cclk() to that of clk_set_rate()

[SF Markus Elfring]

>> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
>> 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 <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
>> ---
>>  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 <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

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"?

Regards,
Markus

Re: [PATCH] blackfin-cpufreq: Change return type of cpu_set_cclk() to that of clk_set_rate()

[Viresh Kumar]

On 19-12-15, 09:23, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
> >> 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 <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
> >> ---
> >>  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 <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> 
> 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

Re: blackfin-cpufreq: How to mark cpu_set_cclk() as static?

[SF Markus Elfring]

> This should be static, yeah.

Would you like to integrate a corresponding small source code change yourself?
(Do you need a separate patch from me?)

Regards,
Markus

Re: blackfin-cpufreq: How to mark cpu_set_cclk() as static?

[Viresh Kumar]

On 21-12-15, 10:20, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > This should be static, yeah.
> 
> Would you like to integrate a corresponding small source code change yourself?
> (Do you need a separate patch from me?)

Since you reported the issue, it will be good if you can send a patch
for this as well.

-- 
viresh

Re: blackfin-cpufreq: How to mark cpu_set_cclk() as static?

[SF Markus Elfring]

> Since you reported the issue, it will be good if you can send a patch
> for this as well.

I'm sorry if I become a bit picky for this implementation detail.

In which order would you prefer that the properties of the
function "cpu_set_cclk" will be improved?
* Should the linkage specifier be added on a separate source code line?
* Can this fix be combined with my previous update suggestion for
  the return type?

Regards,
Markus

Re: blackfin-cpufreq: How to mark cpu_set_cclk() as static?

[Viresh Kumar]

On 21-12-15, 10:50, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> In which order would you prefer that the properties of the
> function "cpu_set_cclk" will be improved?
> * Should the linkage specifier be added on a separate source code line?

No, it can be there in the same line.

> * Can this fix be combined with my previous update suggestion for
>   the return type?

I think the first patch is already Acked now and can be applied as it
is. Just send the next patch based on the previous one.

-- 
viresh

Re: blackfin-cpufreq: How to mark cpu_set_cclk() as static?

[SF Markus Elfring]

> I think the first patch is already Acked now and can be applied
> as it is. Just send the next patch based on the previous one.

Does it matter to provide the proposed changes as a tiny patch series
with two update steps?

Regards,
Markus

Re: blackfin-cpufreq: How to mark cpu_set_cclk() as static?

[Viresh Kumar]

On 21-12-15, 11:00, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> Does it matter to provide the proposed changes as a tiny patch series
> with two update steps?

Yeah, you can do it that way as well :)

-- 
viresh

[PATCH 0/2] blackfin-cpufreq: Fine-tuning for properties of one function

[SF Markus Elfring]

From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 22:24:18 +0100

Another update suggestion was taken into account after a patch was applied
from static source code analysis.

Markus Elfring (2):
  Change return type of cpu_set_cclk() to that of clk_set_rate()
  Mark cpu_set_cclk() as static

 drivers/cpufreq/blackfin-cpufreq.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

-- 
2.6.3

[PATCH 1/2] blackfin-cpufreq: Change return type of cpu_set_cclk() to that of clk_set_rate()

[SF Markus Elfring]

From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 21:56:27 +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 <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
---
 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;
 	int ret;
-- 
2.6.3

[PATCH 2/2] blackfin-cpufreq: Mark cpu_set_cclk() as static

[SF Markus Elfring]

From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 22:12:26 +0100

The cpu_set_cclk() function was only used in a single source file so far.
Indicate this setting also by the corresponding linkage specifier.

Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
---
 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 2a6f3ac..12e97d8 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
-int cpu_set_cclk(int cpu, unsigned long new)
+static int cpu_set_cclk(int cpu, unsigned long new)
 {
 	struct clk *clk;
 	int ret;
-- 
2.6.3

Re: [PATCH 2/2] blackfin-cpufreq: Mark cpu_set_cclk() as static

[Viresh Kumar]

On 21-12-15, 22:32, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
> Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 22:12:26 +0100
> 
> The cpu_set_cclk() function was only used in a single source file so far.
> Indicate this setting also by the corresponding linkage specifier.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

Well, I never Acked this patch as such and you shouldn't have
mentioned it by yourself. But it looks fine otherwise and so

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

-- 
viresh

Re: blackfin-cpufreq: Mark cpu_set_cclk() as static

[SF Markus Elfring]

> Well, I never Acked this patch as such and you shouldn't have
> mentioned it by yourself.

Did I interpret your positive feedback too early in the way
that I can add this tag myself already?


> But it looks fine otherwise and so
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

Thanks for another acknowledgement.

Regards,
Markus

Re: blackfin-cpufreq: Mark cpu_set_cclk() as static

[Viresh Kumar]

On 22-12-15, 09:29, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > Well, I never Acked this patch as such and you shouldn't have
> > mentioned it by yourself.
> 
> Did I interpret your positive feedback too early in the way
> that I can add this tag myself already?

You aren't supposed to add a Tag on someone else's behalf, even if
they said that the change is okay. Others have to send this
separately.

-- 
viresh

Re: [PATCH 2/2] blackfin-cpufreq: Mark cpu_set_cclk() as static

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Tuesday, December 22, 2015 11:05:43 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 21-12-15, 22:32, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
> > Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 22:12:26 +0100
> > 
> > The cpu_set_cclk() function was only used in a single source file so far.
> > Indicate this setting also by the corresponding linkage specifier.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
> > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> 
> Well, I never Acked this patch as such and you shouldn't have
> mentioned it by yourself. But it looks fine otherwise and so
> 
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>

Series applied, thanks!