[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BANLkTinx-OPhDBVZFrz2V_o8-p4yfTt9Kg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 17:58:06 +0800
From: Axel Lin <axel.lin@...il.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Liam Girdwood <lrg@...mlogic.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] regulator: Fix _regulator_get_voltage if get_voltage
callback is NULL
2011/5/19 Axel Lin <axel.lin@...il.com>:
> 2011/5/19 Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>:
>> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 09:01:58PM +0800, Axel Lin wrote:
>>
>>> @@ -1886,13 +1886,15 @@ static int _regulator_get_voltage(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
>>> if (sel < 0)
>>> return sel;
>>> ret = rdev->desc->ops->list_voltage(rdev, sel);
>>> + goto out;
>>> }
>>
>> Why are you adding this goto? It's not going to change anything...
>>
> no matter what ret value returns from rdev->desc->ops->list_voltage(rdev, sel);
>
> In the case of rdev->desc->ops->get_voltage is NULL,
> current implementation will always return -EINVAL;
>
hi Mark,
I'm thinking maybe you prefer changes like below:
How do you think?
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/core.c b/drivers/regulator/core.c
index 9493f61..2a2e927 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/core.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/core.c
@@ -1887,12 +1887,12 @@ static int _regulator_get_voltage(struct
regulator_dev *rdev)
return sel;
ret = rdev->desc->ops->list_voltage(rdev, sel);
}
- if (rdev->desc->ops->get_voltage)
+ else if (rdev->desc->ops->get_voltage)
ret = rdev->desc->ops->get_voltage(rdev);
else
return -EINVAL;
- return ret - rdev->constraints->uV_offset;
+ return ret < 0 ? ret : ret - rdev->constraints->uV_offset;
}
/**
Regards,
Axel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists