linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
Cc: Axel Lin <axel.lin@ingics.com>,
	Mike Rapoport <mike@compulab.co.il>,
	Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: tps6586x: Having slew rate settings for other than SM0/1 is not fatal
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 18:26:48 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130219182647.GD23508@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5123ACA1.9000408@wwwdotorg.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 772 bytes --]

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 09:47:29AM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 02/16/2013 04:50 AM, Axel Lin wrote:

> > Ignore the setting and show "Only SM0/SM1 can set slew rate" warning is enough,
> > then we can return 0 instead of -EINVAL in tps6586x_regulator_set_slew_rate().
> > 
> > Otherwise, probe() fails.

> Why does probe() fail; what is trying to set a slew rate on a regulator
> that doesn't support it? At least a few days ago in linux-next, this
> patch wasn't needed AFAIK. Is the problem something new?

I rather suspect Axel is doing this based on code inspection and review
rather than testing (either that or he has an enormous lab somewhere
full of all sorts of hardware!) - what he's saying is that the error
handling here seems excessive.

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

  reply	other threads:[~2013-02-19 18:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-02-16 11:50 [PATCH] regulator: tps6586x: Having slew rate settings for other than SM0/1 is not fatal Axel Lin
2013-02-19 16:47 ` Stephen Warren
2013-02-19 18:26   ` Mark Brown [this message]
2013-02-19 19:32     ` Stephen Warren
2013-02-19 20:07       ` Mark Brown
2013-02-20  0:53   ` Axel Lin
2013-02-20  2:12     ` Stephen Warren

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=20130219182647.GD23508@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
    --to=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
    --cc=axel.lin@ingics.com \
    --cc=ldewangan@nvidia.com \
    --cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mike@compulab.co.il \
    --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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).