[PATCH] timer: Return count from timer_ops.get_count

[Sean Anderson <seanga2@gmail.com>]

On 9/8/20 7:56 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Sean,
> 
> 
> On Mon, 7 Sep 2020 at 12:19, Sean Anderson <seanga2@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> No timer drivers return an error from get_count. Instead of possibly
>> returning an error, just return the count directly.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sean Anderson <seanga2@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> Passing CI (but not otherwise tested):
>> https://dev.azure.com/seanga2/u-boot/_build/results?buildId=25&view=results
>>
>> This patch depends on
>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/list/?series=198797
>>
>>  arch/riscv/lib/andes_plmt.c       |  6 ++----
>>  arch/riscv/lib/sifive_clint.c     |  6 ++----
>>  drivers/timer/ag101p_timer.c      |  5 ++---
>>  drivers/timer/altera_timer.c      |  6 ++----
>>  drivers/timer/arc_timer.c         |  6 ++----
>>  drivers/timer/ast_timer.c         |  6 ++----
>>  drivers/timer/atcpit100_timer.c   |  5 ++---
>>  drivers/timer/atmel_pit_timer.c   |  6 ++----
>>  drivers/timer/cadence-ttc.c       |  6 ++----
>>  drivers/timer/dw-apb-timer.c      |  6 ++----
>>  drivers/timer/mpc83xx_timer.c     |  6 ++----
>>  drivers/timer/mtk_timer.c         |  6 ++----
>>  drivers/timer/nomadik-mtu-timer.c |  6 ++----
>>  drivers/timer/omap-timer.c        |  6 ++----
>>  drivers/timer/ostm_timer.c        |  6 ++----
>>  drivers/timer/riscv_timer.c       | 21 +++++++++------------
>>  drivers/timer/rockchip_timer.c    |  5 ++---
>>  drivers/timer/sandbox_timer.c     |  6 ++----
>>  drivers/timer/sti-timer.c         |  6 ++----
>>  drivers/timer/stm32_timer.c       |  6 ++----
>>  drivers/timer/timer-uclass.c      |  3 ++-
>>  drivers/timer/tsc_timer.c         |  6 ++----
>>  include/timer.h                   |  5 ++---
>>  23 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 93 deletions(-)
>>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
> 
> This seems OK to me. The function should not be called until the
> driver is probed. It might be worth mentioning that probing must make
> the timer valid (always from then on)?
> 

Sure. I will update the docs in the next revision.

--Sean