On 01/16/2013 05:31 AM, Hiroshi Doyu wrote: > Prashant Gaikwad <pgaik...@nvidia.com> wrote @ Fri, 11 Jan 2013 08:46:20 > +0100: > ... >> +struct clk *tegra_clk_periph(const char *name, const char **parent_names, >> + int num_parents, struct tegra_clk_periph >> *periph, >> + void __iomem *clk_base, u32 offset) ... >> +struct clk *tegra_clk_periph_nodiv(const char *name, const char >> **parent_names, >> + int num_parents, struct tegra_clk_periph >> *periph, >> + void __iomem *clk_base, u32 offset) ... > > The above two functions are almost duplicate, can we take the common part > from them?
Sure, that looks reasonable. > struct clk *__tegra_clk_periph(const char *name, const char **parent_names, > int num_parents, struct tegra_clk_periph *periph, > void __iomem *clk_base, u32 offset, int div) > periph->divider.reg = clk_base + offset; That will also need to be conditional. > periph->divider.hw.clk = div ? NULL : clk; And that test is inverted. > static inline struct clk *tegra_clk_periph(const char *name, const char > **parent_names, > int num_parents, struct tegra_clk_periph *periph, > void __iomem *clk_base, u32 offset) I'd rather just make these regular functions in the .c file; otherwise they have to go into the header file, which means prototyping __tegra_clk_periph() there and it just gets messy. -- 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/
