Re: [PATCHv2 1/5] clk: samsung: exynos5410: Add NULL pointer checks in clock init

2014-07-31 Thread Humberto Naves
Hi, I am bit confused by your response: first you mentioned that I should remove the NULL check for variable np, but later on you suggested that I should rearrange the conditional statement to avoid adding more indentation. My guess is that I should remove that if statement altogether? Regarding

Re: [PATCHv2 1/5] clk: samsung: exynos5410: Add NULL pointer checks in clock init

2014-07-31 Thread Tomasz Figa
On 31.07.2014 15:13, Humberto Naves wrote: > Hi, > > I am bit confused by your response: first you mentioned that I should > remove the NULL check for variable np, but later on you suggested that > I should rearrange the conditional statement to avoid adding more > indentation. That was just a si

Re: [PATCHv2 1/5] clk: samsung: exynos5410: Add NULL pointer checks in clock init

2014-07-31 Thread Tomasz Figa
Hi Humberto, Please see my comments inline. On 31.07.2014 13:22, Humberto Silva Naves wrote: > Added NULL pointer checks for device_node input parameter and > for the samsung_clk_provider context returned by samsung_clk_init. > Even though the *current* samsung_clk_init function never returns > a

[PATCHv2 1/5] clk: samsung: exynos5410: Add NULL pointer checks in clock init

2014-07-31 Thread Humberto Silva Naves
Added NULL pointer checks for device_node input parameter and for the samsung_clk_provider context returned by samsung_clk_init. Even though the *current* samsung_clk_init function never returns a NULL pointer, it is good to keep this check in place to avoid possible problems in the future due to c