On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 03:18:42PM +, Phil Edworthy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Any other comments on this patch and patch 2/2
> (https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/12/3/326)?
Was on vacations, sorry.
> > > I would start new sentence from new line (this will emphasize the
> > > possible
> > > variants)
> > >
; Geert
> Uytterhoeven ; Uwe Kleine-König koe...@pengutronix.de>; linux-...@vger.kernel.org; linux-
> ker...@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v9 1/2] clk: Add comment about
> __of_clk_get_by_name() error values
>
> Hi Andy,
>
>
Hi Andy,
On 03 December 2018 13:31 Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 11:13:08AM +, Phil Edworthy wrote:
> > It's not immediately obvious from the code that failure to get a clock
> > provider can return either -ENOENT or -EINVAL. Therefore, add a
> > comment to highlight this.
>
On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 11:13:08AM +, Phil Edworthy wrote:
> It's not immediately obvious from the code that failure to get a
> clock provider can return either -ENOENT or -EINVAL. Therefore, add
> a comment to highlight this.
> +/*
> + * Beware the return values when np is valid, but no clock
4 matches
Mail list logo
