From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <mail@maciej.szmigiero.name>
Received: from vps-vb.mhejs.net (vi37-28-154-113.vibiznes.pl [37.28.154.113])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256
 bits)) (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6EBB21A1147
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 01:23:23 +1000 (AEST)
Message-ID: <55BA415D.4080706@maciej.szmigiero.name>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 17:23:09 +0200
From: "Maciej S. Szmigiero" <mail@maciej.szmigiero.name>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>
CC: "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>,
 Timur Tabi <timur@tabi.org>,
 Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@gmail.com>, Xiubo Li <Xiubo.Lee@gmail.com>,
 Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
 Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>,
 Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>,
 "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
 linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] ASoC: fsl_ssi: enable IPG clock during AC'97 reg
 access
References: <55BA35A6.5050609@maciej.szmigiero.name>
 <CAOMZO5DJhCXr0oxY7q4TKs0AVS4nW6tDq4EHSGQHOZwf95YWWw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOMZO5DJhCXr0oxY7q4TKs0AVS4nW6tDq4EHSGQHOZwf95YWWw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

Hi Fabio,

On 30.07.2015 17:20, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Hi Maciej,
> 
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Maciej S. Szmigiero
> <mail@maciej.szmigiero.name> wrote:
> 
>>  static unsigned short fsl_ssi_ac97_read(struct snd_ac97 *ac97,
>> @@ -1151,6 +1160,14 @@ static unsigned short fsl_ssi_ac97_read(struct snd_ac97 *ac97,
>>         unsigned short val = -1;
>>         u32 reg_val;
>>         unsigned int lreg;
>> +       int ret;
>> +
>> +       ret = clk_prepare_enable(fsl_ac97_data->clk);
>> +       if (ret) {
>> +               pr_err("ac97 read clk_prepare_enable failed: %d\n",
>> +                       ret);
>> +               return -1;
> 
> return ret, please.
> 

This function normal return value is an AC'97 register value,
so isn't more appropriate to return 0xffff in case of error
than linux error code?

Best regards,
Maciej Szmigiero