Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 11 Apr 2016 12:18:11 +0100 | From | Lee Jones <> | Subject | Re: [RESEND PATCH v7 2/6] mfd: cros_ec: Add cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status helper |
| |
On Tue, 05 Apr 2016, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> So that callers of cros_ec_cmd_xfer don't have to repeat boilerplate > code when checking for errors from the EC side. > > Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> > Reviewed-by: Benson Leung <bleung@chromium.org> > --- > > Changes in v7: None > Changes in v6: None > Changes in v5: > - Check explicitly for !EC_RES_SUCCESS as suggested by Benson Leung. > > Changes in v4: None > Changes in v3: None > Changes in v2: None > > drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ > include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 32 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c > index c792e116e621..aaccdde1c9d5 100644 > --- a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c > +++ b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c > @@ -472,3 +472,17 @@ int cros_ec_get_next_event(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev) > return get_keyboard_state_event(ec_dev); > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL(cros_ec_get_next_event); > + > +int cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev, > + struct cros_ec_command *msg) > +{ > + int ret = cros_ec_cmd_xfer(ec_dev, msg);
I don't really like function calls during declaration time.
If you make the call here, you don't have to leave a pointless '\n' between it and checking the return value.
> + if (ret < 0) > + dev_err(ec_dev->dev, "Command xfer error (err:%d)\n", ret); > + else if (msg->result != EC_RES_SUCCESS) > + return -EECRESULT - msg->result; > + > + return ret; > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status); > diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h b/include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h > index ddc935ef1911..e4c4c0480c14 100644 > --- a/include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h > +++ b/include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h > @@ -40,6 +40,9 @@ > #define EC_MAX_REQUEST_OVERHEAD 1 > #define EC_MAX_RESPONSE_OVERHEAD 2 > > +/* ec_command return value for non-success result from EC */ > +#define EECRESULT 1000 > + > /* > * Command interface between EC and AP, for LPC, I2C and SPI interfaces. > */ > @@ -250,6 +253,21 @@ int cros_ec_cmd_xfer(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev, > struct cros_ec_command *msg); > > /** > + * cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status - Send a command to the ChromeOS EC > + * > + * This function is identical to cros_ec_cmd_xfer, except it returns succes > + * status only if both the command was transmitted successfully and the EC > + * replied with success status. It's not necessary to check msg->result when > + * using this function.
Is it useful for callers of cros_ec_cmd_xfer() to ever not do this? If not, why don't you make these changes in cros_ec_cmd_xfer() itself?
> + * @ec_dev: EC device > + * @msg: Message to write > + * @return: Num. of bytes transferred on success, <0 on failure > + */ > +int cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev, > + struct cros_ec_command *msg); > + > +/** > * cros_ec_remove - Remove a ChromeOS EC > * > * Call this to deregister a ChromeOS EC, then clean up any private data.
-- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
| |