From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 11:00:22 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] drivercore: add new error value for deferred probe
In-Reply-To: <20111007064349.GD27508@kroah.com>
References: <1317963790-29426-1-git-send-email-manjugk@ti.com>
	<1317963790-29426-2-git-send-email-manjugk@ti.com>
	<20111007064349.GD27508@kroah.com>
Message-ID: <20111007100022.GB19080@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 11:43:49PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 10:33:06AM +0500, G, Manjunath Kondaiah wrote:

> > +#define EPROBE_DEFER	517	/* restart probe again after some time */

> Can we really do this?  Isn't this some user/kernel api here?

> What's wrong with just "overloading" on top of an existing error code?
> Surely one of the other 516 types could be used here, right?

There was some discussion of this in the previous patch round before the
code was changed - it does end up adding an externally visible error
code but it doesn't really make any difference, especially if we don't
propagate it externally.  We've already got some other codes in a
similar style, though I can't remember the examples that were quoted
offhand.  Adding the new code avoids confusion about exactly what the
intent of the driver is.