clk: ti: Fix some errors found by static checkers

drivers/clk/ti/clk-814x.c:34:12: warning: symbol 'dm814x_adpll_early_init' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/clk/ti/clk-814x.c:58:12: warning: symbol 'dm814x_adpll_enable_init_clocks' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/clk/ti/adpll.c:465 ti_adpll_recalc_rate() warn: should '__readw(d->regs + 20) << 18' be a 64 bit type?
drivers/clk/ti/adpll.c:945 ti_adpll_probe() error: we previously assumed 'd->clocks' could be null (see line 921)

The last one looks like a real bug because we don't return an
error on allocation failure.

Cc: Tero Kristo <t-kristo@ti.com>
Tested-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
This commit is contained in:
Stephen Boyd 2016-03-01 10:51:42 -08:00 committed by Michael Turquette
parent c2ee9bdc85
commit 8a8b6eb7a8
2 changed files with 4 additions and 4 deletions

View File

@ -462,7 +462,7 @@ static unsigned long ti_adpll_recalc_rate(struct clk_hw *hw,
spin_lock_irqsave(&d->lock, flags);
frac_m = readl_relaxed(d->regs + ADPLL_FRACDIV_OFFSET);
frac_m &= ADPLL_FRACDIV_FRACTIONALM_MASK;
rate = readw_relaxed(d->regs + ADPLL_MN2DIV_OFFSET) << 18;
rate = (u64)readw_relaxed(d->regs + ADPLL_MN2DIV_OFFSET) << 18;
rate += frac_m;
rate *= parent_rate;
divider = (readw_relaxed(d->regs + ADPLL_M2NDIV_OFFSET) + 1) << 18;
@ -919,7 +919,7 @@ static int ti_adpll_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
TI_ADPLL_NR_CLOCKS,
GFP_KERNEL);
if (!d->clocks)
goto free;
return -ENOMEM;
err = ti_adpll_init_dco(d);
if (err) {

View File

@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ static struct ti_dt_clk dm814_clks[] = {
static bool timer_clocks_initialized;
int __init dm814x_adpll_early_init(void)
static int __init dm814x_adpll_early_init(void)
{
struct device_node *np;
@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ static const char * const init_clocks[] = {
"pll290clkout", /* DDR 481c5290.adpll.clkout */
};
int __init dm814x_adpll_enable_init_clocks(void)
static int __init dm814x_adpll_enable_init_clocks(void)
{
int i, err;