On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 07:10:24AM +1300, Tony Prisk wrote:
[...]
> @@ -87,6 +98,11 @@ static int vt8500_pwm_enable(struct pwm_chip *chip, struct
> pwm_device *pwm)
> {
> struct vt8500_chip *vt8500 = to_vt8500_chip(chip);
>
> + if (!clk_enable(vt8500->clk)) {
> + dev_err(chip->dev, "failed to enable clock\n");
> + return -EBUSY;
> + };
> +
I don't think that works. The clock API returns 0 on success and a
negative error code on failure. So this should rather be something like:
err = clk_enable(vt8500->clk);
if (err < 0) {
dev_err(chip->dev, "failed to enable clock: %d\n", err);
return err;
}
> @@ -123,6 +153,12 @@ static int __devinit pwm_probe(struct platform_device
> *pdev)
> chip->chip.ops = &vt8500_pwm_ops;
> chip->chip.base = -1;
> chip->chip.npwm = VT8500_NR_PWMS;
> + chip->clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, NULL);
> +
The blank line should go above the call to devm_clk_get().
> + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(chip->clk)) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "clock source not specified\n");
> + return PTR_ERR(chip->clk);
> + }
[...]
> + if (!clk_prepare(chip->clk)) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to prepare clock\n");
> + return -EBUSY;
> + }
> +
Same comment here. I wonder how this code can work, since if the clock
is properly prepared, then it will return 0, and the above will return
-EBUSY.
> ret = pwmchip_add(&chip->chip);
> - if (ret < 0)
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to add pwmchip\n");
Error messages can be considered prose, so this should be: "failed to
add PWM chip".
Thierry
pgpnYee5NEgWa.pgp
Description: PGP signature
