Hi Fabio,
On 30.07.2015 17:20, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Hi Maciej,
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Maciej S. Szmigiero
> <m...@maciej.szmigiero.name> wrote:
>
>> static unsigned short fsl_ssi_ac97_read(struct snd_ac97 *ac97,
>> @@ -1151,6 +1160,14 @@ static unsigned short fsl_ssi_ac97_read(struct
>> snd_ac97 *ac97,
>> unsigned short val = -1;
>> u32 reg_val;
>> unsigned int lreg;
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + ret = clk_prepare_enable(fsl_ac97_data->clk);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + pr_err("ac97 read clk_prepare_enable failed: %d\n",
>> + ret);
>> + return -1;
>
> return ret, please.
>
This function normal return value is an AC'97 register value,
so isn't more appropriate to return 0xffff in case of error
than linux error code?
Best regards,
Maciej Szmigiero
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
