public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lrg@ti.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: fixed: support deferred probe for DT GPIOs
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2012 12:48:58 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120630114857.GW28922@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FEDCA2B.3060204@wwwdotorg.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1064 bytes --]

On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 09:30:51AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:

> I did consider making of_get_fixed_voltage_config() return a result
> code, but then it needs some other way of returning the pointer, so
> that seemed just as convoluted. Oh, I suppose it could use ERR_PTR()
> to do that; that'd be nice and simple. Would that do?

Meh, or just have the caller pass in the platform data rather than
allocate it in the function.

> Re: gpiolib doing it: How is that possible? of_get_named_gpio()
> certainly can return -EPROBE_DEFER, but the caller would still need to
> check it. The ideal case might be to just do:

> ret = gpio_request(of_get_named_gpio(...));
> if (ret)
>     return ret;

> and have gpio_request pass -EPROBE_DEFER from input to output.

Even better just have gpio_request() just return -EPROBE_DEFER instead
of -ENODEV.  There is no sane case where you'd request a GPIO you didn't
have a reasonable idea was going to be registered at some point (or
could be with appropriate system configuration) so we should just assume
that might happen.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

      reply	other threads:[~2012-06-30 11:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-06-28 22:31 [PATCH] regulator: fixed: support deferred probe for DT GPIOs Stephen Warren
2012-06-29  1:25 ` Mark Brown
2012-06-29 15:30   ` Stephen Warren
2012-06-30 11:48     ` Mark Brown [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20120630114857.GW28922@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
    --to=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lrg@ti.com \
    --cc=swarren@nvidia.com \
    --cc=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox