lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Sun, 19 Sep 2021 21:33:29 +0200
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     "zhiyong.tao" <zhiyong.tao@...iatek.com>
Cc:     Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@...omium.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        Sean Wang <sean.wang@...nel.org>,
        srv_heupstream <srv_heupstream@...iatek.com>,
        hui.liu@...iatek.com, Eddie Huang <eddie.huang@...iatek.com>,
        Light Hsieh <light.hsieh@...iatek.com>,
        Biao Huang <biao.huang@...iatek.com>,
        Hongzhou Yang <hongzhou.yang@...iatek.com>,
        Sean Wang <sean.wang@...iatek.com>,
        Seiya Wang <seiya.wang@...iatek.com>,
        Devicetree List <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" 
        <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 4/4] pinctrl: mediatek: add rsel setting on MT8195

On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 11:31 AM zhiyong.tao <zhiyong.tao@...iatek.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2021-09-06 at 18:09 +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:

> > > > > +       if (!found) {
> > > > > +               dev_err(hw->dev, "Not support rsel value %d Ohm
> > > > > for
> > > > > pin = %d (%s)\n",
> > > > > +                       arg, desc->number, desc->name);
> > > > > +               return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > > >
> > > > I believe ENOTSUPP is the correct one. EOPNOTSUPP seems to be
> > > > network
> > > > related.
> > > >
> > >
> > > if we change it as "ENOTSUPP", it will report warning"ENOTSUPP is
> > > not
> > > SUSV4 error code, prefer EOPNOTSUP" when checking patch.
> >
> > The context surrounding this warning seems to be that ENOTSUPP is
> > hard
> > for userspace to understand. AFAIK the return code here does not get
> > passed to userspace? And the pinctrl core does check for EINVAL or
> > ENOTSUPP, so I think this is a valid use case.
> >
> > Linus?
> >
>
> Hi Linus,
>
> Do you have some suggestion for the warning issue?

Ignore the warning. We use this code in the pinctrl subsystem.

The pinctrl subsystem has no userspace API so that is certainly
not a problem.

Yours,
Linus Walleij

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ