From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755306AbbJAQdG (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Oct 2015 12:33:06 -0400 Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([178.209.37.122]:48657 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752321AbbJAQdE (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Oct 2015 12:33:04 -0400 Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 18:32:57 +0200 From: Andrew Lunn To: Neil Armstrong Cc: "David S. Miller" , Jesper Dangaard Brouer , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] net: dsa: exit probe if no switch were found Message-ID: <20151001163257.GQ20219@lunn.ch> References: <560B9B7C.9080406@baylibre.com> <560D50E4.6040400@baylibre.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <560D50E4.6040400@baylibre.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 05:27:32PM +0200, Neil Armstrong wrote: > On 09/30/2015 10:21 AM, Neil Armstrong wrote: > > If no switch were found in dsa_setup_dst, return -ENODEV and > > exit the dsa_probe cleanly. ... > Couldn't we use the probe defer mechanism here ? (until complete rework is done) Hi Neil I was thinking the same last night. We know the switch should be there, otherwise it would not be in DT. So returning -EPROBE_DEFER would be valid. Andrew