[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACxGe6swdnhk_GCAv3siSx4kxNQXmCLDbwBFjsX5VPNfCBc2Mg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 09:48:19 -0600
From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <greg@...ah.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Manjunath GKondaiah <manjunath.gkondaiah@...aro.org>,
Dilan Lee <dilee@...dia.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3] drivercore: Add driver probe deferral mechanism
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:26 AM, Mark Brown
<broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 04:12:10PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 03:16:43PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>
>> > used but it's not a blocker for anything. Devices doing this would need
>> > some way to figure out if they should -EBUSY or fail otherwise.
>
>> Just to avoid confusion - ITYM -EAGAIN there. -EBUSY is already used
>> by drivers to mean "someone else claimed a resource I need" be it the
>> IO region or an IRQ resource...
>
> Yes, I do - sorry.
Actually, in the next iteration, I'm thinking it would be a good idea
to create a new #define to only be used by probe deferral. I want it
to be easy to find all the drivers that are using this mechanism
without needing to filter all the unrelated hits. However, this is a
kernel-only thing so it is probably not appropriate to add it to
include/asm-generic/errno.h. I could use some guidance/advice as to
the best way to handle this.
g.
--
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