Re: [PATCH] gpio: pca953x: do not ignore i2c errors

From: Bartosz Golaszewski
Date: Wed Sep 29 2021 - 14:41:59 EST


On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 7:22 PM Nikita Yushchenko
<nikita.yoush@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> From: Andrey Gusakov <andrey.gusakov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Per gpio_chip interface, error shall be proparated to the caller.
>
> Attempt to silent diagnostics by returning zero (as written in the
> comment) is plain wrong, because the zero return can be interpreted by
> the caller as the gpio value.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Gusakov <andrey.gusakov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Nikita Yushchenko <nikita.yoush@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c | 11 ++---------
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c
> index f5cfc0698799..8ebf369b3ba0 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c
> @@ -468,15 +468,8 @@ static int pca953x_gpio_get_value(struct gpio_chip *gc, unsigned off)
> mutex_lock(&chip->i2c_lock);
> ret = regmap_read(chip->regmap, inreg, &reg_val);
> mutex_unlock(&chip->i2c_lock);
> - if (ret < 0) {
> - /*
> - * NOTE:
> - * diagnostic already emitted; that's all we should
> - * do unless gpio_*_value_cansleep() calls become different
> - * from their nonsleeping siblings (and report faults).
> - */
> - return 0;
> - }
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
>
> return !!(reg_val & bit);
> }
> --
> 2.30.2
>

Applied, thanks!

Bart