[PATCH 01/10] Add a common struct clk

On 05/04/2011 04:35 PM, Paul Walmsley wrote:

Hi

On Mon, 2 May 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:

quoted

This does bring us to an interesting question though: should clk_set_rate()
succeed or fail with a NULL clk?  There is no clock to control, so my
feeling is that it should fail, just like clk_get_rate() should return
zero because the rate is meaningless.  There is no rate to get and no
rate to set.

Returning an error would be my preference when a NULL or bogus clock
pointer is passed to any clk_* operation, especially since those
operations will need to dereference the clock pointer.

Wouldn't returning an error for all clk_* ops for a NULL clock make it 
meaningless? It would be the same as -ENOENT in that case.

-Saravana

-- 
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.