lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jan]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH -mm 2/2] PWM LED driver
On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 21:32:32 -0800
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 15:33:45 +0100 Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@atmel.com> wrote:
>
> > + if (i > 0) {
> > + for (i = i - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
> > + led_classdev_unregister(&leds[i].cdev);
> > + pwm_channel_free(&leds[i].pwmc);
> > + }
> > + }
>
> Could be:
>
> while (--i > 0) {
> led_classdev_unregister(&leds[i].cdev);
> pwm_channel_free(&leds[i].pwmc);
> }
>
> or thereabouts.

Almost...we need to clean up for leds[0] too. Using a postfix decrement
should take care of that. How about the patch below?

Haavard

From de5002ad71a1000f81817410f02a7d9fbd5d4ecd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@atmel.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:14:14 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] PWM led driver: Simplify cleanup loop

Why use a for loop inside an if() when we can get away with a simple
while() loop?

Signed-off-by: Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@atmel.com>
---
drivers/leds/leds-atmel-pwm.c | 8 +++-----
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/leds/leds-atmel-pwm.c b/drivers/leds/leds-atmel-pwm.c
index af61f55..187031c 100644
--- a/drivers/leds/leds-atmel-pwm.c
+++ b/drivers/leds/leds-atmel-pwm.c
@@ -100,11 +100,9 @@ static int __init pwmled_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
return 0;

err:
- if (i > 0) {
- for (i = i - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
- led_classdev_unregister(&leds[i].cdev);
- pwm_channel_free(&leds[i].pwmc);
- }
+ while (i-- > 0) {
+ led_classdev_unregister(&leds[i].cdev);
+ pwm_channel_free(&leds[i].pwmc);
}
kfree(leds);

--
1.5.3.8


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-01-28 10:19    [W:0.700 / U:0.012 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site