Hi Ingo, On Tuesday 31 March 2015 09:14:52 Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Daniel Lezcano <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: Laurent Pinchart <[email protected]> > > > > The arch_timer_probed function returns whether the given time doesn't > > need to be probed. This can be the case when the timer has been probed > > already, but also when it has no corresponding enabled node in DT. > > > > Rename the function to arch_timer_need_probe and invert its return value > > to better reflect the function's purpose and behaviour. > > > > Acked-by: Sudeep Holla <[email protected]> > > Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart > > <[email protected]> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <[email protected]> > > --- > > > > drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c | 13 +++++++------ > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c > > b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c index a3025e7..50bb7f2 100644 > > --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c > > +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c > > @@ -661,17 +661,17 @@ static const struct of_device_id > > arch_timer_mem_of_match[] __initconst = {> > > }; > > > > static bool __init > > > > -arch_timer_probed(int type, const struct of_device_id *matches) > > +arch_timer_need_probe(int type, const struct of_device_id *matches) > > If we do a rename we might as well use valid English spelling such as > 'arch_timer_needs_probing()'?
Of course. Should I resend the patch or can you fix that while applying it ? -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
