[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111007100022.GB19080@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 11:00:22 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc: "G, Manjunath Kondaiah" <manjugk@...com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
Dilan Lee <dilee@...dia.com>,
Manjunath GKondaiah <manjunath.gkondaiah@...aro.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] drivercore: add new error value for deferred probe
On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 11:43:49PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 10:33:06AM +0500, G, Manjunath Kondaiah wrote:
> > +#define EPROBE_DEFER 517 /* restart probe again after some time */
> Can we really do this? Isn't this some user/kernel api here?
> What's wrong with just "overloading" on top of an existing error code?
> Surely one of the other 516 types could be used here, right?
There was some discussion of this in the previous patch round before the
code was changed - it does end up adding an externally visible error
code but it doesn't really make any difference, especially if we don't
propagate it externally. We've already got some other codes in a
similar style, though I can't remember the examples that were quoted
offhand. Adding the new code avoids confusion about exactly what the
intent of the driver is.
--
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