Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1240836 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] drivers: clk: st: PLL rate change implementation for DVFS

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] drivers: clk: st: PLL rate change implementation  for DVFS Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> - 2015-10-06 20:10 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] drivers: clk: st: PLL rate change implementation  for DVFS Gabriel Fernandez <gabriel.fernandez@linaro.org> - 2015-10-07 09:50 +0200

#1240836 — Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] drivers: clk: st: PLL rate change implementation for DVFS

On 10/05, Gabriel Fernandez wrote:
> @@ -452,7 +651,7 @@ static const struct clk_ops st_pll1200c32_ops = {
>  static struct clk * __init clkgen_pll_register(const char *parent_name,
>  				struct clkgen_pll_data	*pll_data,
>  				void __iomem *reg,
> -				const char *clk_name)
> +				const char *clk_name, spinlock_t *lock)

Is there a reason we pass lock here but never use it in this
function?

>  {
>  	struct clkgen_pll *pll;
>  	struct clk *clk;

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1241204

Hi Stephen,

No there is no reason. I will fix it.

Thanks for review.

Best regards

Gabriel

On 6 October 2015 at 20:06, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> On 10/05, Gabriel Fernandez wrote:
>> @@ -452,7 +651,7 @@ static const struct clk_ops st_pll1200c32_ops = {
>>  static struct clk * __init clkgen_pll_register(const char *parent_name,
>>                               struct clkgen_pll_data  *pll_data,
>>                               void __iomem *reg,
>> -                             const char *clk_name)
>> +                             const char *clk_name, spinlock_t *lock)
>
> Is there a reason we pass lock here but never use it in this
> function?
>
>>  {
>>       struct clkgen_pll *pll;
>>       struct clk *clk;
>
> --
> Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
> a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web