Hello Wenyou,
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 01:57:27PM +0800, Wenyou Yang wrote:
>
> static void __init at91_pm_init(void)
> {
> -#ifdef CONFIG_AT91_SLOW_CLOCK
> at91_pm_sram_init();
> -#endif
>
> pr_info("AT91: Power Management%s\n", (slow_clock ? " (with slow clock
> mode)" : ""));
Details, but the ternary operation can be removed here, slow_clock now
defines whether we have PM support at all, not whether we have
slow_clock mode available.
Maybe we should not even display this message on the console if we
failed to allocate sram for slow_clock, we already fired a message
saying that PM is not available at all in at91_pm_sram_init().
Sylvain
--
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/
