Re: [RFC PATCH v3] drivercore: Add driver probe deferral mechanism

[Grant Likely]

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:26 AM, Mark Brown
<broonie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 04:12:10PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 03:16:43PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>
>> > used but it's not a blocker for anything.  Devices doing this would need
>> > some way to figure out if they should -EBUSY or fail otherwise.
>
>> Just to avoid confusion - ITYM -EAGAIN there.  -EBUSY is already used
>> by drivers to mean "someone else claimed a resource I need" be it the
>> IO region or an IRQ resource...
>
> Yes, I do - sorry.

Actually, in the next iteration, I'm thinking it would be a good idea
to create a new #define to only be used by probe deferral.  I want it
to be easy to find all the drivers that are using this mechanism
without needing to filter all the unrelated hits.  However, this is a
kernel-only thing so it is probably not appropriate to add it to
include/asm-generic/errno.h.  I could use some guidance/advice as to
the best way to handle this.

g.
--
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/