Messages in this thread | | | From | Grant Likely <> | Date | Mon, 26 Sep 2011 09:48:19 -0600 | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH v3] drivercore: Add driver probe deferral mechanism |
| |
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:26 AM, Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 04:12:10PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 03:16:43PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > >> > used but it's not a blocker for anything. Devices doing this would need >> > some way to figure out if they should -EBUSY or fail otherwise. > >> Just to avoid confusion - ITYM -EAGAIN there. -EBUSY is already used >> by drivers to mean "someone else claimed a resource I need" be it the >> IO region or an IRQ resource... > > Yes, I do - sorry.
Actually, in the next iteration, I'm thinking it would be a good idea to create a new #define to only be used by probe deferral. I want it to be easy to find all the drivers that are using this mechanism without needing to filter all the unrelated hits. However, this is a kernel-only thing so it is probably not appropriate to add it to include/asm-generic/errno.h. I could use some guidance/advice as to the best way to handle this.
g. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |