lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jun]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] regulator: fixed: support deferred probe for DT GPIOs
On 06/28/2012 07:25 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 04:31:32PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>
>> static struct fixed_voltage_config *
>> -of_get_fixed_voltage_config(struct device *dev)
>> +of_get_fixed_voltage_config(struct device *dev, bool
>> *defer_probe)
>
> This is pretty contorted, we should just be able to pass the
> return value back more directly and of course ideally gpiolib would
> be doing the -EPROBE_DEFER for us anyway (I did send a patch for
> this, Grant didn't apply it due to a mostly unrelated issue in the
> current probe deferral implementation). Or just defer if we don't
> get a config passed back or something.

I did consider making of_get_fixed_voltage_config() return a result
code, but then it needs some other way of returning the pointer, so
that seemed just as convoluted. Oh, I suppose it could use ERR_PTR()
to do that; that'd be nice and simple. Would that do?

Re: gpiolib doing it: How is that possible? of_get_named_gpio()
certainly can return -EPROBE_DEFER, but the caller would still need to
check it. The ideal case might be to just do:

ret = gpio_request(of_get_named_gpio(...));
if (ret)
return ret;

and have gpio_request pass -EPROBE_DEFER from input to output.

i.e. only check the gpio_request() result code, not the
of_get_named_gpio() result code, and rely on gpio_request() to do
validation later.

But gpio_request takes an unsigned int, so the error code wouldn't
survive the translation:-(


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-06-29 20:41    [W:1.061 / U:0.520 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site