Just two minor style issues in this patch.

On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 06:43:01PM +0530, Tanmay Upadhyay wrote:
> +static inline int pxa168_add_sdh(int id, struct sdhci_pxa_platdata *data)
> +{
> +     struct pxa_device_desc *d = NULL;
> +
> +     switch (id) {
> +     case 1: d = &pxa168_device_sdh1; break;
> +     case 2: d = &pxa168_device_sdh2; break;
> +     case 3: d = &pxa168_device_sdh3; break;
> +     case 4: d = &pxa168_device_sdh4; break;

Style.
        case X:
                d = &y;
                break;

> +static void sdh_clk_disable(struct clk *clk)
> +{
> +     __raw_writel(__raw_readl(clk->clk_rst) & ~(clk->enable_val),

Parens around clk->enable_val not required.

> +     INIT_CLKREG(&clk_sdh1, NULL, "PXA-SDHCLK"),
> +     INIT_CLKREG(&clk_sdh2, NULL, "PXA-SDHCLK"),
> +     INIT_CLKREG(&clk_sdh3, NULL, "PXA-SDHCLK"),
> +     INIT_CLKREG(&clk_sdh4, NULL, "PXA-SDHCLK"),

So these clocks are registered with the same name?  How are they
distinguished by clk_get()?

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to