Re: [PATCH 07/13] scpi: ignore init_versions failure if reported not supported

[Neil Armstrong]

On 08/19/2016 06:46 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> 
> 
> On 18/08/16 11:11, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>> In Amlogic GXBB Legacy SCPI, the LEGACY_SCPI_CMD_SCPI_CAPABILITIES report
>> as SCPI_ERR_SUPPORT, so do not fail if this command is not supported.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  drivers/firmware/arm_scpi.c | 12 +++++++-----
>>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scpi.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scpi.c
>> index 3fe39fe..d3be4c5 100644
>> --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scpi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scpi.c
>> @@ -1111,12 +1111,13 @@ err:
>>          ret = scpi_info->ops->init_versions(scpi_info);
>>      else
>>      ret = scpi_init_versions(scpi_info);
>> -    if (ret) {
>> +    if (ret && ret != -EOPNOTSUPP) {
>>          dev_err(dev, "incorrect or no SCP firmware found\n");
>>          scpi_remove(pdev);
>>          return ret;
>>      }
>>
> 
> Why not deal it in init_versions itself.
> 
>> +    if (ret != -EOPNOTSUPP) {
>>      _dev_info(dev, "SCP Protocol %d.%d Firmware %d.%d.%d version\n",
>>            PROTOCOL_REV_MAJOR(scpi_info->protocol_version),
>>            PROTOCOL_REV_MINOR(scpi_info->protocol_version),
> 
> Why not have default value like 0.0 ? Just add a comment. Since get
> version is exported out, IMO having default value makes more sense. What
> do you think ?
> 
>> @@ -1124,15 +1125,16 @@ err:
>>            FW_REV_MINOR(scpi_info->firmware_version),
>>            FW_REV_PATCH(scpi_info->firmware_version));
>>
>> +        ret = sysfs_create_groups(&dev->kobj, versions_groups);
>> +        if (ret)
>> +            dev_err(dev, "unable to create sysfs version group\n");
>> +    }
>> +
> 
> Again this can stay as is if we have default.
> 

Printing version 0.0 firmware 0.0.0 is a nonsense for me...

Neil