Re: [PATCH 4/5] gpiolib: handle deferral probe error
From: Grant Likely
Date: Fri Oct 07 2011 - 18:10:02 EST
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 4:06 AM, Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Oct 2011 10:33:09 +0500
> "G, Manjunath Kondaiah" <manjugk@xxxxxx> wrote:
>> The gpio library should return -EPROBE_DEFER in gpio_request
>> if gpio driver is not ready.
> Why not use the perfectly good existing error codes we have for this ?
> We have EAGAIN and EUNATCH both of which look sensible.
I want a distinct error code for probe deferral so that a) it doesn't
overlap with something a driver is already doing, and b) so that all
the users can be found again at a later date.
That said, I'm not in agreement with this patch. It is fine for gpio
lib to have a code that means the pin doesn't exist (yet), but the
device driver needs to be the one to decide whether or not it is
appropriate to use probe deferral.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/