[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMRc=MdHSsctXYor2ycWqRJHCUciweRTie_TjW9h0yfN7wZhOA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2024 17:58:28 +0200
From: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To: Mario Limonciello <superm1@...nel.org>
Cc: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>, Krzysztof Wilczyński <kw@...ux.com>,
Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>, Bert Karwatzki <spasswolf@....de>, caleb.connolly@...aro.org,
bhelgaas@...gle.com, amit.pundir@...aro.org, neil.armstrong@...aro.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
Praveenkumar Patil <PraveenKumar.Patil@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] pci: bus: only call of_platform_populate() if
CONFIG_OF is enabled
On Mon, Jul 8, 2024 at 5:53 PM Mario Limonciello <superm1@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On 7/8/2024 10:49, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>
> >
> > If you have CONFIG_OF enabled then of_platform_populate() will go the
> > normal path and actually try to populate sub-nodes of the host bridge
> > node. If there are no OF nodes (not a device-tree system) then it will
> > fail.
> >
> > Bart
>
> So how about keep both patches then?
No, it doesn't make sense. If CONFIG_OF is enabled then -ENODEV is a
valid error. I was wrong to apply the previous patch as it would lead
to hiding actual errors on OF-enabled systems.
Bart
Powered by blists - more mailing lists