Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH 1/2] hwmon: (lm90) split set&show temp as common codes

[Wei Ni <wni@nvidia.com>]

On 02/25/2014 04:57 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 02/25/2014 12:21 AM, Wei Ni wrote:
>> On 02/25/2014 02:32 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>> On 02/24/2014 10:21 PM, Wei Ni wrote:
>>>> Split set&show temp codes as common functions, so we can use it
>>>> directly when implement linux thermal framework.
>>>> And handle error return value for the lm90_select_remote_channel
>>>> and write_tempx, then set_temp8 and set_temp11 could return it
>>>> to user-space.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Wei Ni <wni@nvidia.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
>>>> ---
>>>>    drivers/hwmon/lm90.c |  170 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>>>>    1 file changed, 115 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c b/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
>>>> index c9ff08d..fb9e224 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
>>>> @@ -473,20 +473,29 @@ static int lm90_read16(struct i2c_client *client, u8 regh, u8 regl, u16 *value)
>>>>     * various registers have different meanings as a result of selecting a
>>>>     * non-default remote channel.
>>>>     */
>>>> -static inline void lm90_select_remote_channel(struct i2c_client *client,
>>>> -					      struct lm90_data *data,
>>>> -					      int channel)
>>>> +static inline int lm90_select_remote_channel(struct i2c_client *client,
>>>> +					     struct lm90_data *data,
>>>> +					     int channel)
>>>>    {
>>>>    	u8 config;
>>>> +	int err;
>>>>
>>>>    	if (data->kind = max6696) {
>>>>    		lm90_read_reg(client, LM90_REG_R_CONFIG1, &config);
>>>>    		config &= ~0x08;
>>>>    		if (channel)
>>>>    			config |= 0x08;
>>>> -		i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(client, LM90_REG_W_CONFIG1,
>>>> -					  config);
>>>> +		err = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(client, LM90_REG_W_CONFIG1,
>>>> +						config);
>>>> +		if (err < 0) {
>>>> +			dev_err(&client->dev,
>>>> +				"Failed to select remote channel %d, err %d\n",
>>>> +				channel, err);
>>>> +			return err;
>>>
>>> Not my call to make, but I really dislike all that new noisiness.
>>> Sure, it is ok to pass the error back, but in my opinion that is
>>> good enough. If every driver in the kernel would be that noisy,
>>> the log would be all but useless.
>>
>> This was discussed in https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/12/227
>> Jean wish to catch and return write errors,then the set_temp8() could
>> return error to user-space.
>>
> 
> The link doesn't work for me. Anyway, catching write errors and being
> noisy about it are different issues, and I am a bit surprised that
> Jean wants the driver to be noisy about it, but if so I won't object.

Sorry, the link should be https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/12/227

> 
> Guenter
> 


_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors