Re: [PATCH 1/3] CLK: uninline clk_prepare() and clk_unprepare()

[Viresh Kumar]

On 22 November 2012 02:13, Mike Turquette <mturquette@xxxxxx> wrote:
> HAVE_CLK logically wraps HAVE_CLK_PREPARE.  There is no point in
> selecting HAVE_CLK_PREPARE without HAVE_CLK.
>
> Looking through the code I see that this used to be the case.  Commit
> 93abe8e "clk: add non CONFIG_HAVE_CLK routines" moved the
> clk_(un)prepare declarations outside of #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_CLK.  That
> commit was authored by you.  Can you elaborate on why that aspect of the
> patch was needed?

Haha... Caught red handed :(

Before this commit, nothing was enclosed within CONFIG_HAVE_CLK and
this patch only introduced it. I am not really sure, why i kept
prepare/unprepare
out of it though :(

Maybe because some platform at that time is using it directly, without
CONFIG_HAVE_CLK. Not sure.

--
viresh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/