Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 18 Jun 2016 18:08:54 -0700 | From | Stefan Agner <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] mfd: rn5t618: register power off callback optionally |
| |
On 2016-06-16 07:59, Lee Jones wrote: > On Tue, 07 Jun 2016, Stefan Agner wrote: > >> Only register power off if the PMIC is defined as system power >> controller (see Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/ >> power-controller.txt). >> >> Reviewed-by: Marcel Ziswiler <marcel.ziswiler@toradex.com> >> Signed-off-by: Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch> > > These should be chronological. >
Has been discussed already here: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-May/345835.html
It's an artifact of my development process, I keep the commits in my local branches without signed off lines and add them before sending out patches. So whenever I prepare a new revision, collected acks, sobs are chronological, but end up before my sob.
But since you are the second maintainer which has objection to that style I probably should change that...
>> --- >> drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c | 10 +++++++--- >> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c >> index 7607ced..d9b4d40 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c >> +++ b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c >> @@ -103,9 +103,13 @@ static int rn5t618_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c, >> return ret; >> } >> >> - if (!pm_power_off) { >> - rn5t618_pm_power_off = priv; >> - pm_power_off = rn5t618_power_off; >> + if (of_device_is_system_power_controller(i2c->dev.of_node)) { >> + if (!pm_power_off) { >> + rn5t618_pm_power_off = priv; >> + pm_power_off = rn5t618_power_off; >> + } else { >> + dev_err(&i2c->dev, "Failed to set poweroff capability, already defined\n"); > > This is not an error. Please use dev_warn() instead. >
Hm, I agree... FWIW, I copied the code (and that message) from here, where dev_err is probably also not appropriate: drivers/regulator/act8865-regulator.c
> Also, is this message actually accurate? Your commit message would > indicate that it's not.
Hm, maybe we should bail out with an error in that case since DT explicitly asks to be power controller... Is that what you mean?
-- Stefan
> >> + } >> } >> >> return 0;
| |