[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FEDCA2B.3060204@wwwdotorg.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 09:30:51 -0600
From: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
CC: Liam Girdwood <lrg@...com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: fixed: support deferred probe for DT GPIOs
On 06/28/2012 07:25 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 04:31:32PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>
>> static struct fixed_voltage_config *
>> -of_get_fixed_voltage_config(struct device *dev)
>> +of_get_fixed_voltage_config(struct device *dev, bool
>> *defer_probe)
>
> This is pretty contorted, we should just be able to pass the
> return value back more directly and of course ideally gpiolib would
> be doing the -EPROBE_DEFER for us anyway (I did send a patch for
> this, Grant didn't apply it due to a mostly unrelated issue in the
> current probe deferral implementation). Or just defer if we don't
> get a config passed back or something.
I did consider making of_get_fixed_voltage_config() return a result
code, but then it needs some other way of returning the pointer, so
that seemed just as convoluted. Oh, I suppose it could use ERR_PTR()
to do that; that'd be nice and simple. Would that do?
Re: gpiolib doing it: How is that possible? of_get_named_gpio()
certainly can return -EPROBE_DEFER, but the caller would still need to
check it. The ideal case might be to just do:
ret = gpio_request(of_get_named_gpio(...));
if (ret)
return ret;
and have gpio_request pass -EPROBE_DEFER from input to output.
i.e. only check the gpio_request() result code, not the
of_get_named_gpio() result code, and rely on gpio_request() to do
validation later.
But gpio_request takes an unsigned int, so the error code wouldn't
survive the translation:-(
--
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