Subject: [PATCH 04/18] ARM: at91: make ST (System Timer) soc independent

From: [email-masked] (Ryan Mallon)
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 12:52:45 +1100

On 20/02/12 12:38, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:

> On 11:22 Mon 20 Feb     , Ryan Mallon wrote:
>> On 18/02/12 04:49, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
>>
>>> From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <[email-masked]>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <[email-masked]>
>>> Acked-by: Nicolas Ferre <[email-masked]>
>>> ---
>>>  arch/arm/mach-at91/at91rm9200.c              |    4 +-
>>>  arch/arm/mach-at91/at91rm9200_time.c         |   37 ++++++++++++++++----------
>>>  arch/arm/mach-at91/generic.h                 |    1 +
>>>  arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91_st.h    |   32 +++++++++++++++-------
>>>  arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91rm9200.h |    2 +-
>>>  drivers/watchdog/at91rm9200_wdt.c            |    8 +++---
>>>  6 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91rm9200.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91rm9200.c
>>
>> Hi Jean, Nicolas,
>>
>> Patch looks mostly good, couple of points below.
>>
>> ~Ryan
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>  	/* Cancel any pending alarm; flush any pending IRQ */
>>> -	at91_sys_write(AT91_ST_RTAR, alm);
>>> -	(void) at91_sys_read(AT91_ST_SR);
>>> +	at91_st_write(AT91_ST_RTAR, alm);
>>> +	(void) at91_st_read(AT91_ST_SR);
>>
>>
>> Can we please remove the (void) casting of the return value when making
>> this change, especially since at91_st_read is now a macro which doesn't
>> even have a return value. Same in a few other places.
> modification done by script and it's no the scope of this patch

That isn't an excuse to leave incorrect code there. It is a simple fix.

~Ryan