On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 10:56:58AM +0100, Philipp Zabel wrote: > Am Donnerstag, den 26.02.2015, 09:02 +0000 schrieb Ben Dooks: > > On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 09:27:57AM -0800, Mike Turquette wrote: > [...] > > > From: Michael Turquette <mturquette at linaro.org> > > > Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 09:11:01 -0800 > > > Subject: [PATCH] clk: introduce clk_is_match > > > > > > Some drivers compare struct clk pointers as a means of knowing > > > if the two pointers reference the same clock hardware. This behavior is > > > dubious (drivers must not dereference struct clk), but did not cause any > > > regressions until the per-user struct clk patch was merged. Now the test > > > for matching clk's will always fail with per-user struct clk's. > > > > > > clk_is_match is introduced to fix the regression and prevent drivers > > > from comparing the pointers manually. > > > > small observaton, clk_is_same() is linguistically nicer. > > How about clk_equal() ?
That's good, the only issue that's not clear in any of these names is that does this mean "the same clock", a "clock of the same rate" or a "clock that is equivalent to in the rate and phase but not subject to the same gate". -- Ben Dooks, ben at fluff.org, http://www.fluff.org/ben/ Large Hadron Colada: A large Pina Colada that makes the universe disappear.
