[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <875xzgh7dr.fsf@geanix.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 08:38:08 +0100
From: Esben Haabendal <esben@...nix.com>
To: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
Cc: linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, Gregor Herburger
<gregor.herburger@...tq-group.com>, Pengutronix Kernel Team
<kernel@...gutronix.de>, Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>, Shawn Guo
<shawnguo@...nel.org>, Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>, Fabio
Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@...wei.com>,
Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@...tq-group.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: imx: move to generic GPIO recovery
Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de> writes:
> ....
>> + struct i2c_bus_recovery_info *bri = &i2c_imx->rinfo;
>>
>> - dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "using scl%s for recovery\n",
>> - rinfo->sda_gpiod ? ",sda" : "");
>> + bri->pinctrl = devm_pinctrl_get(&pdev->dev);
>> + if (IS_ERR(bri->pinctrl))
>> + return PTR_ERR(bri->pinctrl);
>
> According to the commit message - "pinctrl becomes optional", but this
> code stops probe if pinctrl will fail for one or another reason. I do
> not see any place returning NULL on fail. Do I'm missing something?
The caller, i2c_imx_probe(), does only check for -EPROBE_DEFER, and
simply ignores any other error codes.
I assume it is on purpose, so any problems with initializing i2c
recovery does not cause complete failure of the i2c controller, which
seems sane to me.
/Esben
Powered by blists - more mailing lists