From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: core - make IO calls return a valid errno on failure. Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 12:43:21 +0100 Message-ID: <20110726114321.GE7285@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1311588959-3512-1-git-send-email-lrg@ti.com> <20110725212213.GD6086@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <1311679099.4088.6.camel@CNA0741383> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from opensource2.wolfsonmicro.com (opensource.wolfsonmicro.com [80.75.67.52]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 414DB1038C5 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 13:43:23 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1311679099.4088.6.camel@CNA0741383> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: Liam Girdwood Cc: "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 12:18:19PM +0100, Liam Girdwood wrote: > On Mon, 2011-07-25 at 23:22 +0200, Mark Brown wrote: > > Yeah, it really should but it's kind of tricky for the reads as we're > > returning errors in band and we could have 32 bit registers (I'm > > guessing the platform versions already do) so we lose. :/ Not sure > > what the best thing to do there is, changing to return the errors out of > > band for reads is more painful than I care to contemplate. > Oh, I agree it would be painful for a rework here. But why did you > suggest this sort of update in a previous patch comment ? (Unless I > misunderstood). Dunno the specific posting but there's two things I can think of: - This isn't an issue for writes so they can and should pass back error codes, it's only reads that have trouble. - If I see people converting an error code into -EINVAL or something I tend to complain about that.