[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGETcx_x4O_M4OJvCSZNu_wroYoyog9nAW7OivS56qzEhFmnHg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 18:11:09 -0800
From: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Todd Kjos <tkjos@...gle.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/6] pinctrl: Remove use of driver_deferred_probe_check_state_continue()
Sending again because of accidental HTML email.
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 9:08 PM John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> With the earlier sanity fixes to
> driver_deferred_probe_check_state() it should be usable for the
> pinctrl logic here.
>
> So tweak the logic to use driver_deferred_probe_check_state()
> instead of driver_deferred_probe_check_state_continue()
>
> Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
> Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>
> Cc: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
> Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
> Cc: Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
> Cc: Todd Kjos <tkjos@...gle.com>
> Cc: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
> Cc: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
> Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>
> Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
> Cc: Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>
> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> Cc: linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
> Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
> Signed-off-by: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
> ---
> drivers/pinctrl/devicetree.c | 9 +++++----
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/devicetree.c b/drivers/pinctrl/devicetree.c
> index 9357f7c46cf3..1ed20ac2243f 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/devicetree.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/devicetree.c
> @@ -127,11 +127,12 @@ static int dt_to_map_one_config(struct pinctrl *p,
> np_pctldev = of_get_next_parent(np_pctldev);
> if (!np_pctldev || of_node_is_root(np_pctldev)) {
> of_node_put(np_pctldev);
> + ret = driver_deferred_probe_check_state(p->dev);
> /* keep deferring if modules are enabled unless we've timed out */
> - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MODULES) && !allow_default)
> - return driver_deferred_probe_check_state_continue(p->dev);
> -
> - return driver_deferred_probe_check_state(p->dev);
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MODULES) && !allow_default &&
Is this IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MODULES) still necessary? At the end of this
series, doesn't driver_deferred_probe_check_state() already return
-EPROBE_DEFER if modules are enabled and timeout hasn't happened?
-Saravana
> + (ret == -ENODEV))
> + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
> + return ret;
> }
> /* If we're creating a hog we can use the passed pctldev */
> if (hog_pctldev && (np_pctldev == p->dev->of_node)) {
> --
> 2.17.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists