From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: vinod.koul@intel.com (Vinod Koul) Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 23:03:00 +0530 Subject: [PATCH 4/4] dmaengine: pxa_dma: fix the maximum requestor line In-Reply-To: <87fuwt28eu.fsf@belgarion.home> References: <1455225798-9510-1-git-send-email-robert.jarzmik@free.fr> <1455225798-9510-5-git-send-email-robert.jarzmik@free.fr> <20160215163524.GI19598@localhost> <87fuwt28eu.fsf@belgarion.home> Message-ID: <20160215173300.GN19598@localhost> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 06:24:57PM +0100, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > Vinod Koul writes: > > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 10:23:18PM +0100, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > >> @@ -1399,13 +1405,17 @@ static int pxad_probe(struct platform_device *op) > >> return PTR_ERR(pdev->base); > >> > >> of_id = of_match_device(pxad_dt_ids, &op->dev); > >> - if (of_id) > >> + if (of_id) { > >> of_property_read_u32(op->dev.of_node, "#dma-channels", > >> &dma_channels); > >> - else if (pdata && pdata->dma_channels) > >> + of_property_read_u32(op->dev.of_node, "#requestors", > >> + &nb_requestors); > > > > I think we should check the return value here. This might be err in case > > when we have older DT on platform, but still should work with default in > > that case > > Okay, but how should the code react to the err case, more specifically to > -EINVAL or -ENODATA ? As this property is optional as per the device-tree > description, the current code leaves nb_requestors = 0, as is specified in the > description, and fits the mmp_pdma case. > > What do you think should be done ? A warning message ? Something else ? Message is fine, but in order for not to regress we should set this to 32 (IIRC default before this, right) and not zero. -- ~Vinod