Re: [patch 2.6.25-git] i2c_adapters: return -Errno not -1

From: David Brownell <david-b-yBeKhBN/0LDR7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org>
To: Jean Delvare <khali-PUYAD+kWke1g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
Cc: i2c-GZX6beZjE8VD60Wz+7aTrA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.25-git] i2c_adapters:  return -Errno not -1
Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 10:13:25 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200805111013.25440.david-b@pacbell.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080510225548.36297637-ig7AzVSIIG7kN2dkZ6Wm7A@public.gmane.org>

On Saturday 10 May 2008, you wrote:
> >  
> >  static int ali1563_block_start(struct i2c_adapter * a)
> > @@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ static int ali1563_block_start(struct i2
> >               data & HST_STS_BUSERR ? "No response or Bus Collision " : "",
> >               data & HST_STS_DEVERR ? "Device Error " : "",
> >               !(data & HST_STS_DONE) ? "Transaction Never Finished " : "");
> > -     return -1;
> > +     return -EIO;
> >  }
> 
> And same here. That's a little more work, admittedly.

Returning ENXIO for BUSERR/no-response doesn't follow your
heuristic of trusting the logspam-eliminators ... plus, it's
not clear that's not a different failure mode on that path.

NVidia seems to not have ALI 1563 specs on line (sigh) so
for now I'll just stick to your heuristic.

I did make the "timeout" fault unique there, since that
fault was clearly distinguishable.

_______________________________________________
i2c mailing list
i2c-GZX6beZjE8VD60Wz+7aTrA@public.gmane.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/i2c