On 9 January 2013 11:20, Tushar Behera <tushar.beh...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 01/08/2013 06:33 PM, Rajagopal Venkat wrote: >> while reparenting a clock, NULL check is done for clock in >> consideration and its new parent. So re-check is not required. >> If done, else part becomes unreachable. >> >> Signed-off-by: Rajagopal Venkat <rajagopal.ven...@linaro.org> >> --- >> drivers/clk/clk.c | 5 +---- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c >> index 251e45d..f896584 100644 >> --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c >> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c >> @@ -1048,10 +1048,7 @@ void __clk_reparent(struct clk *clk, struct clk >> *new_parent) >> >> hlist_del(&clk->child_node); >> >> - if (new_parent) >> - hlist_add_head(&clk->child_node, &new_parent->children); >> - else >> - hlist_add_head(&clk->child_node, &clk_orphan_list); >> + hlist_add_head(&clk->child_node, &new_parent->children); >> >> #ifdef CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_DEBUG >> if (!inited) >> > > The same logic holds good for following piece of code too. > > 1060 |-------if (new_parent) > 1061 |-------|-------new_parent_d = new_parent->dentry; > 1062 |-------else > 1063 |-------|-------new_parent_d = orphandir;
Yes. Thanks for pointing out. > > > -- > Tushar Behera -- Regards, Rajagopal -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
