From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtprelay0191.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.191]:55939 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752375AbbJ1SxK (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Oct 2015 14:53:10 -0400 Message-ID: <1446058386.2757.145.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] iio: light: lm3533-als: Print error message on invalid resistance From: Joe Perches To: Bjorn Andersson Cc: Jonathan Cameron , Hartmut Knaack , Lars-Peter Clausen , Johan Hovold , Peter Meerwald , "linux-iio@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 11:53:06 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20151028183750.GB24668@usrtlx11787.corpusers.net> References: <1445796586-28683-1-git-send-email-bjorn.andersson@sonymobile.com> <1445796586-28683-2-git-send-email-bjorn.andersson@sonymobile.com> <1445973507.2757.40.camel@perches.com> <20151028183750.GB24668@usrtlx11787.corpusers.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-iio-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2015-10-28 at 11:37 -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Tue 27 Oct 12:18 PDT 2015, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Sun, 2015-10-25 at 11:09 -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > > > Print an error message to indicate that invalid configuration data was > > > provided in the platform_data, rather than just aborting initialization. > > Perhaps it'd be nicer to show the 3 values. > I do agree that it would be helpful to hint the developer about the > expected range. The problem I see here though is that, in the case of > devicetree we've now moved from resistance to a register value. [] > So would you be okay with not improving the message? Or would you like > me to just move it into the code in patch 1 - and leave the > platform_data case as it was (with a silent failure)? [] > > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/light/lm3533-als.c b/drivers/iio/light/lm3533-als.c > > [] > > > @@ -743,8 +743,10 @@ static int lm3533_als_set_resistor(struct lm3533_als *als, u8 val) > > > { > > > int ret; > > > > > > - if (val < LM3533_ALS_RESISTOR_MIN || val > LM3533_ALS_RESISTOR_MAX) > > > + if (val < LM3533_ALS_RESISTOR_MIN || val > LM3533_ALS_RESISTOR_MAX) { > > > + dev_err(&als->pdev->dev, "invalid resistor value\n"); > > > return -EINVAL; > > > + }; > > > What I suggested was just a trivial proposal. Whatever you do is fine with me.