Re: [PATCH] ALSA: at73c213: clk_round_rate() can return a zero upon error

[Takashi Iwai]

At Tue, 10 Dec 2013 11:46:43 -0800,
Paul Walmsley wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 9 Dec 2013, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> 
> > At Mon, 9 Dec 2013 18:40:48 -0800, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> >>
> >> Treat both negative and zero return values from clk_round_rate()
> >> as errors.  This is needed since subsequent patches will convert
> >> clk_round_rate()'s return value to be an unsigned type, rather
> >> than a signed type, since some clock sources can generate rates higher
> >> than (2^31)-1 Hz.
> >
> > Is the behavior "returning zero upon error" already in 3.13?  That is,
> > should this (and another) patch be taken as a 3.13-fix patch, or it's
> > for 3.14?
> 
> It depends on the platform.  The Common Clock Framework code returns 0 
> upon error right now.  But other clock framework implementations, such as 
> the one used by the Atmel AT91 boards, return negative error codes.  And 
> looking at the mainline code, it looks like the at73c213 chip is most 
> likely to be used on AT91 boards.
> 
> So if you want to send this patch for v3.13-rc, it's probably justified,
> but it's low-priority.  v3.14 is also fine.
> 
> I'll be sending some followup patches to the platform maintainers to 
> change the clock framework code to return 0 upon error.  But those can't 
> be applied until the drivers are fixed, if we want to avoid regressions in 
> error path handling.  So from that point of view, applying these driver 
> patches in v3.13-rc would mean there is less delay to getting the platform 
> clock framework fixes upstream :-)

OK, unless any known regressions are reported, I'm inclined to put
this for 3.14.  Now applied to for-next branch.  Thanks!


Takashi
--
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/