Re: [PATCH V2 1/3] regulator: return -EINVAL from regulator_set_voltage() for !CONFIG_REGULATOR
From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Date: Mon Jun 02 2014 - 07:58:49 EST
On Monday, June 02, 2014 12:59:23 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Currently regulator_set_voltage() returns zero when support for regulators isn't
> present in kernel, i.e. CONFIG_REGULATOR=n.
> Make it return -EINVAL to propagate error instead of success here.
> Audit of all users of this routine is done to make sure nothing breaks due to
> this change.
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
Well, I'd say this patch series is for Mark and I'm fine with patch [3/3].
> V1->V2: - New patch as suggested by Mark.
> include/linux/regulator/consumer.h | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> diff --git a/include/linux/regulator/consumer.h b/include/linux/regulator/consumer.h
> index 1a4a8c1..28fa089 100644
> --- a/include/linux/regulator/consumer.h
> +++ b/include/linux/regulator/consumer.h
> @@ -394,7 +394,7 @@ static inline void regulator_bulk_free(int num_consumers,
> static inline int regulator_set_voltage(struct regulator *regulator,
> int min_uV, int max_uV)
> - return 0;
> + return -EINVAL;
> static inline int regulator_get_voltage(struct regulator *regulator)
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
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/