Re: [PATCH] net: phy: micrel: support !CONFIG_HAVE_CLK

2015-05-08 Thread Johan Hovold
On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 01:30:58PM +0200, Niklas Cassel wrote: > On 04/27/2015 07:59 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Niklas Cassel > > wrote: > > > >> Since NULL is a valid clock, we shouldn't use > >> IS_ERR_OR_NULL. > > > > Yes, but this code is not using IS_ERR_

Re: [PATCH] net: phy: micrel: support !CONFIG_HAVE_CLK

2015-05-04 Thread Niklas Cassel
On 04/27/2015 07:59 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Niklas Cassel wrote: > >> Since NULL is a valid clock, we shouldn't use >> IS_ERR_OR_NULL. > > Yes, but this code is not using IS_ERR_OR_NULL. > > It seems that you are not describing the problem you are trying to s

Re: [PATCH] net: phy: micrel: support !CONFIG_HAVE_CLK

2015-04-27 Thread Fabio Estevam
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Niklas Cassel wrote: > Since NULL is a valid clock, we shouldn't use > IS_ERR_OR_NULL. Yes, but this code is not using IS_ERR_OR_NULL. It seems that you are not describing the problem you are trying to solve. What is the exact issue you are seeing? > c

Re: [PATCH] net: phy: micrel: support !CONFIG_HAVE_CLK

2015-04-27 Thread David Miller
From: Johan Hovold Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 13:08:07 +0200 > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 01:05:17PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 01:00:50PM +0200, Niklas Cassel wrote: >> > Since NULL is a valid clock, we shouldn't use >> > IS_ERR_OR_NULL. >> > >> > Implemented as Russell King

Re: [PATCH] net: phy: micrel: support !CONFIG_HAVE_CLK

2015-04-27 Thread Johan Hovold
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 01:05:17PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 01:00:50PM +0200, Niklas Cassel wrote: > > Since NULL is a valid clock, we shouldn't use > > IS_ERR_OR_NULL. > > > > Implemented as Russell King suggested in: > > > > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150207172949.ge

Re: [PATCH] net: phy: micrel: support !CONFIG_HAVE_CLK

2015-04-27 Thread Johan Hovold
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 01:00:50PM +0200, Niklas Cassel wrote: > Since NULL is a valid clock, we shouldn't use > IS_ERR_OR_NULL. > > Implemented as Russell King suggested in: > > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150207172949.ge8...@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk > > Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel > --- > driv