Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 4 Mar 2014 11:38:23 -0600 | From | Suman Anna <> | Subject | Re: [PATCHv4 4/7] hwspinlock/core: add common OF helpers |
| |
Hi Ohad,
On 03/02/2014 02:19 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com> wrote: >>> On 02/07/2014 04:49 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: >>>> It seems to be standard practice to pass the error value back to the >>>> consumer, so you should >>>> return ERR_PTR(ret); here instead of the NULL... >>> >>> >>> I have modelled the return values in this function based on the return >>> values in the existing hwspin_lock_request interfaces. I would need to >>> change those functions as well. >>> >>> Ohad, >>> Do you have any objections to the return code convention change? >> >> Unless strictly needed, I prefer we don't switch to the ERR_PTR code >> convention, as it reduces code readability and increases chances of >> user bugs. >> >> In our case, switching to ERR_PTR and friends seems only to optimize a >> few error paths, and I'm not sure it's a big win over simplicity. > > When introducing the ability to reference a hwspin lock via a phandle > in device tree it makes a big difference to be able to differ between > the case of "initialization failed" or "device not yet probed"; so > that the client knows if it should fail or retry later. >
Can you confirm the changes you want me to make, so that I can refresh and post a v5 for 3.15?
regards Suman
| |