Hi Mike,

On Mon, 2012-09-10 at 20:14 +0100, Mike Turquette wrote:

Quoting Pawel Moll (2012-09-03 09:25:25)

quoted

+static int vexpress_osc_probe(struct vexpress_config_device *vecdev)
+{
+       int err;
+       struct device_node *node = vecdev->dev.of_node;
+       struct vexpress_osc_info *info = vecdev->dev.platform_data;
+       struct clk_init_data init;
+       struct vexpress_osc *osc;
+       struct clk *clk;
+       const char * const *dev_ids = NULL;
+       u32 range[2];
+
+       if (vecdev->status & VEXPRESS_CONFIG_DEVICE_PROBED_EARLY)
+               return 0;
+
+       osc = kzalloc(sizeof(*osc), GFP_KERNEL);
+       if (!osc) {
+               err = -ENOMEM;
+               goto error;

Minor nitpick: the error label tries to free osc, which in this case
shouldn't be freed because it is NULL.

<snip>

quoted

+error:
+       kfree(osc);
+       return err;

$ grep kfree scripts/checkpatch.pl 
# check for needless kfree() checks
			if ($line =~ /\bkfree\(\Q$expr\E\);/) {
				     "kfree(NULL) is safe this check is probably not required\n" . $hereprev);

$ grep -B2 kfree Documentation/CodingStyle 
	...
out:
	kfree(buffer);

;-)

Otherwise patch looks good to me.  There are some changes to headers in
this patch, and it is part of a larger series. How did you want the
common clk patches to get merged?

I'm re-working the series right now, but generally I planned to push
drivers/clk changes via your tree, unless you want me to get it in
through arm-soc.

Cheers!

Pawel