[3/9] pwm: lpss: use c99 initializers in structures

From: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>

Use c99 initializers for structures.

A simplified version of the semantic match that finds this problem is as
follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)

// <smpl>
@decl@
identifier i1,fld;
type T;
field list[n] fs;
@@

struct i1 {
 fs
 T fld;
 ...};

@bad@
identifier decl.i1,i2;
expression e;
initializer list[decl.n] is;
@@

struct i1 i2 = { is,
+ .fld = e
- e
 ,...};
// </smpl>

Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>

---
The patches in this series do not depend on each other.

 drivers/pwm/pwm-lpss.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pwm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 01:20:25PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> From: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>
> 
> Use c99 initializers for structures.
> 
> A simplified version of the semantic match that finds this problem is as
> follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
> 
> // <smpl>
> @decl@
> identifier i1,fld;
> type T;
> field list[n] fs;
> @@
> 
> struct i1 {
>  fs
>  T fld;
>  ...};
> 
> @bad@
> identifier decl.i1,i2;
> expression e;
> initializer list[decl.n] is;
> @@
> 
> struct i1 i2 = { is,
> + .fld = e
> - e
>  ,...};
> // </smpl>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>
> 
> ---
> The patches in this series do not depend on each other.
> 
>  drivers/pwm/pwm-lpss.c |    2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-lpss.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-lpss.c
> index 4df994f..441a046 100644
> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-lpss.c
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-lpss.c
> @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ struct pwm_lpss_boardinfo {
>  
>  /* BayTrail */
>  static const struct pwm_lpss_boardinfo byt_info = {
> -	25000000
> +	.clk_rate = 25000000
>  };
>  
>  static inline struct pwm_lpss_chip *to_lpwm(struct pwm_chip *chip)

I've applied this patch to the for-next branch of the PWM tree. There
was a conflict due to a patch that was recently applied, but it was
trivial to fix it up, so I did.

Thanks,
Thierry