Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] ASoC: fsl_mqs: Don't check clock is NULL before calling clk API
In-Reply-To: cover.1592888591.git.shengjiu.wang@nxp.com
I guess that it should be sufficient to specify such a field once for the header information.
Because clk_prepare_enable and clk_disable_unprepare should check input clock parameter is NULL or not internally,
I find this change description unclear.
then we don't need to check them before calling the function.
Please use an imperative wording for the commit message. https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Docu...
Regards, Markus
On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 3:38 PM Markus Elfring Markus.Elfring@web.de wrote:
In-Reply-To: cover.1592888591.git.shengjiu.wang@nxp.com
I guess that it should be sufficient to specify such a field once for the header information.
seems it's caused by my "git format-patch" command, I will update it, hope it is better next time.
Because clk_prepare_enable and clk_disable_unprepare should check input clock parameter is NULL or not internally,
I find this change description unclear.
clk_prepare_enable and clk_disable_unprepare check the input clock parameter in the beginning of the function, if the parameter is NULL, clk_prepare_enable and clk_disable_unprepare will return immediately.
So Don't need to check input clock parameters before calling clk API.
Do you think this commit message is better?
best regards wang shengjiu
clk_prepare_enable and clk_disable_unprepare check the input clock parameter in the beginning of the function,
These functions call further functions which perform null pointer checks.
if the parameter is NULL, clk_prepare_enable and clk_disable_unprepare will return immediately.
The interpretation of these function implementations seems to be reasonable. Would you like to achieve any improvements for the corresponding software documentation?
So Don't need to check input clock parameters before calling clk API.
What do you find imperative in this wording?
Another wording alternative: Thus omit extra null pointer checks before four function calls.
Regards, Markus
On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 4:55 PM Markus Elfring Markus.Elfring@web.de wrote:
clk_prepare_enable and clk_disable_unprepare check the input clock parameter in the beginning of the function,These functions call further functions which perform null pointer checks.
if the parameter is NULL, clk_prepare_enable and clk_disable_unprepare will return immediately.The interpretation of these function implementations seems to be reasonable. Would you like to achieve any improvements for the corresponding software documentation?
Which document do you mean?
So Don't need to check input clock parameters before calling clk API.What do you find imperative in this wording?
Another wording alternative: Thus omit extra null pointer checks before four function calls.
Regards, Markus
if the parameter is NULL, clk_prepare_enable and clk_disable_unprepare will return immediately.The interpretation of these function implementations seems to be reasonable. Would you like to achieve any improvements for the corresponding software documentation?
Which document do you mean?
Example: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/incl... https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.7.2/source/include/linux/clk.h#L905
Regards, Markus
participants (2)
-
Markus Elfring -
Shengjiu Wang