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

[SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>]

>> 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