[lkml]   [2010]   [Oct]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/3] drivers: misc: add omap_hwspinlock driver
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 5:46 PM, Greg KH <> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 09:44:33AM +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
>> +
>> +static inline struct omap_hwspinlock *omap_hwspinlock_request(void)
>> +{
>> +     return ERR_PTR(-ENOSYS);
>> +}
> One note, do you really want to fail if this option isn't built into the
> kernel, yet you have a driver that is asking for it?  Shouldn't you
> instead just silently succeed, and let the code path get compiled away?
> We did that for debugfs, after learning the pain that procfs had with
> its api for "is not built".  Doing it the way you are requires the user
> to always test for -ENOSYS, when in reality, if that is returned,
> there's nothing the driver can do about it, so it should just not worry
> about it.
> Just something to think about.

Completely agree; if hwspinlock support is not needed, we better let
its users run uninterruptedly. I'll change it.


> thanks,
> greg k-h
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2010-10-19 22:23    [W:0.176 / U:7.140 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site