* [PATCH] ACPI / gpio: do not fall back to parsing _CRS when we get a deferral
@ 2017-03-23 20:21 Dmitry Torokhov
2017-03-28 13:25 ` Linus Walleij
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Dmitry Torokhov @ 2017-03-23 20:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Walleij
Cc: Alexandre Courbot, Mika Westerberg, Andy Shevchenko,
Rafael J. Wysocki, linux-gpio, linux-kernel
If, while locating GPIOs by name, we get probe deferral, we should
immediately report it to caller rather than trying to fall back to parsing
unnamed GPIOs from _CRS block.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
---
drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
index a3faefa44f68..d3f9f028a37b 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
@@ -572,8 +572,10 @@ struct gpio_desc *acpi_find_gpio(struct device *dev,
}
desc = acpi_get_gpiod_by_index(adev, propname, idx, &info);
- if (!IS_ERR(desc) || (PTR_ERR(desc) == -EPROBE_DEFER))
+ if (!IS_ERR(desc))
break;
+ if (PTR_ERR(desc) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
+ return ERR_CAST(desc);
}
/* Then from plain _CRS GPIOs */
--
2.12.1.500.gab5fba24ee-goog
--
Dmitry
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] ACPI / gpio: do not fall back to parsing _CRS when we get a deferral
2017-03-23 20:21 [PATCH] ACPI / gpio: do not fall back to parsing _CRS when we get a deferral Dmitry Torokhov
@ 2017-03-28 13:25 ` Linus Walleij
2017-03-28 13:32 ` Mika Westerberg
2017-03-28 15:03 ` Andy Shevchenko
2017-03-28 15:04 ` Andy Shevchenko
2017-03-30 9:08 ` Linus Walleij
2 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2017-03-28 13:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dmitry Torokhov, Mika Westerberg, Rafael J. Wysocki,
Andy Shevchenko
Cc: Alexandre Courbot, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Dmitry Torokhov
<dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:
> If, while locating GPIOs by name, we get probe deferral, we should
> immediately report it to caller rather than trying to fall back to parsing
> unnamed GPIOs from _CRS block.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Can I get some indication from Mika/Rafael/Andy whether this is correct?
Yours,
Linus Walleij
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] ACPI / gpio: do not fall back to parsing _CRS when we get a deferral
2017-03-28 13:25 ` Linus Walleij
@ 2017-03-28 13:32 ` Mika Westerberg
2017-03-28 15:03 ` Andy Shevchenko
1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Mika Westerberg @ 2017-03-28 13:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Walleij
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov, Rafael J. Wysocki, Andy Shevchenko,
Alexandre Courbot, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 03:25:56PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Dmitry Torokhov
> <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > If, while locating GPIOs by name, we get probe deferral, we should
> > immediately report it to caller rather than trying to fall back to parsing
> > unnamed GPIOs from _CRS block.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
>
> Can I get some indication from Mika/Rafael/Andy whether this is correct?
Sorry, I saw the patch but then forgot to ack it.
Acked-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] ACPI / gpio: do not fall back to parsing _CRS when we get a deferral
2017-03-28 13:25 ` Linus Walleij
2017-03-28 13:32 ` Mika Westerberg
@ 2017-03-28 15:03 ` Andy Shevchenko
1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Andy Shevchenko @ 2017-03-28 15:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Walleij, Dmitry Torokhov, Mika Westerberg,
Rafael J. Wysocki
Cc: Alexandre Courbot, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
On Tue, 2017-03-28 at 15:25 +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Dmitry Torokhov
> <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > If, while locating GPIOs by name, we get probe deferral, we should
> > immediately report it to caller rather than trying to fall back to
> > parsing
> > unnamed GPIOs from _CRS block.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
>
> Can I get some indication from Mika/Rafael/Andy whether this is
> correct?
While Mika agrees on the change, I would like nevertheless to hear Hans'
opinion or even Tested-by tag since it was his fix around those lines.
--
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] ACPI / gpio: do not fall back to parsing _CRS when we get a deferral
2017-03-23 20:21 [PATCH] ACPI / gpio: do not fall back to parsing _CRS when we get a deferral Dmitry Torokhov
2017-03-28 13:25 ` Linus Walleij
@ 2017-03-28 15:04 ` Andy Shevchenko
2017-03-29 16:33 ` Hans de Goede
2017-03-30 9:08 ` Linus Walleij
2 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Andy Shevchenko @ 2017-03-28 15:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dmitry Torokhov, Linus Walleij, Hans de Goede
Cc: Alexandre Courbot, Mika Westerberg, Rafael J. Wysocki, linux-gpio,
linux-kernel
On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 13:21 -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> If, while locating GPIOs by name, we get probe deferral, we should
> immediately report it to caller rather than trying to fall back to
> parsing
> unnamed GPIOs from _CRS block.
+Cc: Hans.
Hans, do have any objections on this? Would you ideally give your
Tested-by?
>
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
> index a3faefa44f68..d3f9f028a37b 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
> @@ -572,8 +572,10 @@ struct gpio_desc *acpi_find_gpio(struct device
> *dev,
> }
>
> desc = acpi_get_gpiod_by_index(adev, propname, idx,
> &info);
> - if (!IS_ERR(desc) || (PTR_ERR(desc) ==
> -EPROBE_DEFER))
> + if (!IS_ERR(desc))
> break;
> + if (PTR_ERR(desc) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
> + return ERR_CAST(desc);
> }
>
> /* Then from plain _CRS GPIOs */
> --
> 2.12.1.500.gab5fba24ee-goog
>
>
--
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] ACPI / gpio: do not fall back to parsing _CRS when we get a deferral
2017-03-28 15:04 ` Andy Shevchenko
@ 2017-03-29 16:33 ` Hans de Goede
2017-03-29 16:42 ` Andy Shevchenko
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Hans de Goede @ 2017-03-29 16:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andy Shevchenko, Dmitry Torokhov, Linus Walleij
Cc: Alexandre Courbot, Mika Westerberg, Rafael J. Wysocki, linux-gpio,
linux-kernel
HI,
On 28-03-17 17:04, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 13:21 -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> If, while locating GPIOs by name, we get probe deferral, we should
>> immediately report it to caller rather than trying to fall back to
>> parsing
>> unnamed GPIOs from _CRS block.
>
> +Cc: Hans.
>
> Hans, do have any objections on this? Would you ideally give your
> Tested-by?
Looks good to me and also does not seem to break anything on my test
devices, so:
Acked-and-Tested-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Regards,
Hans
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c | 4 +++-
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
>> index a3faefa44f68..d3f9f028a37b 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
>> @@ -572,8 +572,10 @@ struct gpio_desc *acpi_find_gpio(struct device
>> *dev,
>> }
>>
>> desc = acpi_get_gpiod_by_index(adev, propname, idx,
>> &info);
>> - if (!IS_ERR(desc) || (PTR_ERR(desc) ==
>> -EPROBE_DEFER))
>> + if (!IS_ERR(desc))
>> break;
>> + if (PTR_ERR(desc) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
>> + return ERR_CAST(desc);
>> }
>>
>> /* Then from plain _CRS GPIOs */
>> --
>> 2.12.1.500.gab5fba24ee-goog
>>
>>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] ACPI / gpio: do not fall back to parsing _CRS when we get a deferral
2017-03-29 16:33 ` Hans de Goede
@ 2017-03-29 16:42 ` Andy Shevchenko
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Andy Shevchenko @ 2017-03-29 16:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Hans de Goede, Dmitry Torokhov, Linus Walleij
Cc: Alexandre Courbot, Mika Westerberg, Rafael J. Wysocki, linux-gpio,
linux-kernel
On Wed, 2017-03-29 at 18:33 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> HI,
>
> On 28-03-17 17:04, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 13:21 -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > If, while locating GPIOs by name, we get probe deferral, we should
> > > immediately report it to caller rather than trying to fall back to
> > > parsing
> > > unnamed GPIOs from _CRS block.
> >
> > +Cc: Hans.
> >
> > Hans, do have any objections on this? Would you ideally give your
> > Tested-by?
>
> Looks good to me and also does not seem to break anything on my test
> devices, so:
>
> Acked-and-Tested-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Thanks!
Linus, I'm fully satisfied :-)
>
> Regards,
>
> Hans
>
>
> >
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c | 4 +++-
> > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-
> > > acpi.c
> > > index a3faefa44f68..d3f9f028a37b 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
> > > @@ -572,8 +572,10 @@ struct gpio_desc *acpi_find_gpio(struct
> > > device
> > > *dev,
> > > }
> > >
> > > desc = acpi_get_gpiod_by_index(adev, propname,
> > > idx,
> > > &info);
> > > - if (!IS_ERR(desc) || (PTR_ERR(desc) ==
> > > -EPROBE_DEFER))
> > > + if (!IS_ERR(desc))
> > > break;
> > > + if (PTR_ERR(desc) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
> > > + return ERR_CAST(desc);
> > > }
> > >
> > > /* Then from plain _CRS GPIOs */
> > > --
> > > 2.12.1.500.gab5fba24ee-goog
> > >
> > >
--
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] ACPI / gpio: do not fall back to parsing _CRS when we get a deferral
2017-03-23 20:21 [PATCH] ACPI / gpio: do not fall back to parsing _CRS when we get a deferral Dmitry Torokhov
2017-03-28 13:25 ` Linus Walleij
2017-03-28 15:04 ` Andy Shevchenko
@ 2017-03-30 9:08 ` Linus Walleij
2 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2017-03-30 9:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dmitry Torokhov
Cc: Alexandre Courbot, Mika Westerberg, Andy Shevchenko,
Rafael J. Wysocki, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Dmitry Torokhov
<dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:
> If, while locating GPIOs by name, we get probe deferral, we should
> immediately report it to caller rather than trying to fall back to parsing
> unnamed GPIOs from _CRS block.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Patch applied and tagged for stable with all ACKs and Tested-by's.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-03-30 9:08 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-03-23 20:21 [PATCH] ACPI / gpio: do not fall back to parsing _CRS when we get a deferral Dmitry Torokhov
2017-03-28 13:25 ` Linus Walleij
2017-03-28 13:32 ` Mika Westerberg
2017-03-28 15:03 ` Andy Shevchenko
2017-03-28 15:04 ` Andy Shevchenko
2017-03-29 16:33 ` Hans de Goede
2017-03-29 16:42 ` Andy Shevchenko
2017-03-30 9:08 ` Linus Walleij
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).