From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Walleij Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI / gpio: do not fall back to parsing _CRS when we get a deferral Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 15:25:56 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20170323202138.GA11912@dtor-ws> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: Received: from mail-it0-f54.google.com ([209.85.214.54]:37617 "EHLO mail-it0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932436AbdC1N02 (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:26:28 -0400 Received: by mail-it0-f54.google.com with SMTP id 190so18224541itm.0 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:26:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20170323202138.GA11912@dtor-ws> Sender: linux-gpio-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org 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 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 Can I get some indication from Mika/Rafael/Andy whether this is correct? Yours, Linus Walleij