[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131203123459.GS27568@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 12:34:59 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Li Xiubo <Li.Xiubo@...escale.com>
Cc: "lgirdwood@...il.com" <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
"perex@...ex.cz" <perex@...ex.cz>, "tiwai@...e.de" <tiwai@...e.de>,
Fabio Estevam <Fabio.Estevam@...escale.com>,
"LW@...O-electronics.de" <LW@...O-electronics.de>,
"oskar@...ra.com" <oskar@...ra.com>,
"alsa-devel@...a-project.org" <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ASoC: SGTL5000: Fix kernel failed while trying to get
optional VDDD supply.
On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 09:49:47AM +0000, Li Xiubo wrote:
> 2, If the regulator dt node is exist but the optional VDDD is absent (i.e.
> The external VDDD is not used), a -EPROBE_DEFER will be returned, if just
> return the -EPROBE_DEFER to the probe(and then the probe deferral
> mechanism will do the probe again later, is that right ?), and then the
> regulator_get_optional() will be called later again, and the -EPROBE_DEFER
> will be returned again too, and now how should I handle -EPROBE_DEFER error
> twice ? Or should there be a counter about this ? That to say when the
> -EPROBE_DEFER error is the second time returned from regulator_get_optional()
> can we ensure that the optional VDDD is really not in use.
The driver should just defer when it's told to defer, I don't understand
why it would want to count anything?
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists