> Thanks for the patch, but I don't understand what problem you're
> pointing out. If autodeps is NULL entering clkdm_init(), then the
> for-loop won't even be entered.
My first patch was wrong, but there's something I think could
be wrong. In clkdm_init() we have:
for (autodep = autodeps; autodep->pwrdm.ptr; autodep++)
_autodep_lookup(autodep);
In _autodep_lookup() we ensure that we don't dereference
autodep by:
if (!autodep)
return;
but if autodep can be NULL we already dereferenced it in
the aforementioned for loop, so shouldn't that be:
for (autodep = autodeps; autodep && autodep->pwrdm.ptr; autodep++)
_autodep_lookup(autodep);
Then since this is the only call to _autodep_lookup() we can remove
that test there. Do you agree?
> It looks like there may be a problem, however, in _clkdm_add_autodeps()
> and _clkdm_del_autodeps() if no autodeps were passed in. What do you
> think about something like the following instead?
>
>
> - Paul
Your suggested patch looks right to me as well.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
