Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:22:28 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/6] sep: Add interfaces for the new functions | From | Hillf Danton <> |
| |
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote: > On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 21:53:50 +0800 > Hillf Danton <dhillf@gmail.com> wrote: > > Sorry don't see what you are pointing out. It might help if you posted > just the small bit in question ?
Hello Alan
> if (1 == test_bit(SEP_LEGACY_SENDMSG_DONE_OFFSET, > &call_status->status)) { > - dev_dbg(&sep->pdev->dev, > - "[PID%d] dcb preparation needed before send msg\n", > + dev_warn(&sep->pdev->dev, > + "[PID%d] dcb prep needed before send msg\n", > current->pid); > error = -EPROTO;
Here error is assigned with -EPROTO,
> goto end_function; > } > > if (!arg) { > - dev_dbg(&sep->pdev->dev, > - "[PID%d] dcb prep null arg\n", current->pid); > - error = -EINVAL; > + dev_warn(&sep->pdev->dev, > + "[PID%d] dcb null arg\n", current->pid); > + error = EINVAL;
why is EINVAL used then instead of -EINVAL?
Is this error case anything special from the above? I guess it is typo.
Good weekend Hillf
> goto end_function; > }
| |