From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933481Ab3BSS0z (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Feb 2013 13:26:55 -0500 Received: from opensource.wolfsonmicro.com ([80.75.67.52]:50498 "EHLO opensource.wolfsonmicro.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933152Ab3BSS0w (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Feb 2013 13:26:52 -0500 Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 18:26:48 +0000 From: Mark Brown To: Stephen Warren Cc: Axel Lin , Mike Rapoport , Laxman Dewangan , Liam Girdwood , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: tps6586x: Having slew rate settings for other than SM0/1 is not fatal Message-ID: <20130219182647.GD23508@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1361015443.11226.1.camel@phoenix> <5123ACA1.9000408@wwwdotorg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="n/aVsWSeQ4JHkrmm" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5123ACA1.9000408@wwwdotorg.org> X-Cookie: Reply hazy, ask again later. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --n/aVsWSeQ4JHkrmm Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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(). > >=20 > > 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. --n/aVsWSeQ4JHkrmm Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRI8PDAAoJELSic+t+oim9L5UP/0nH3LJl0wws6T+pLbjCPi85 0MJddR+tLz8x7bJb0I1uv6T3mRfQU1o/V19fmeoj3K9Tp+WkdsIUEwn78J5XhS9x 7AB6wFmBlqaS3hv7wUGongGFVKmSA+s0Pzk3EkF4Zqws4BiGtmGzRlvUJPFz4t9f B0khv/S+Hc8GCLbDbMoUOMrNgQMkppSUfTdy30V2+qI2o/PRRu+W8z9amOfr2v6V 9oE/SHywmF6bmTV/dX35/noID0hibClqSp1ePT8oKbkHfB1LPMFO2hUqVORWx5Au n2iWO2qVZbAs56uCqowTI9JPd9wey7CYszWiRWD6m0/ntrr+w3OBCHJrWmypKqN5 xQSLorNDEcW/JLnO5sz7MfUsPgKKXT0+4nuCBAZu6tbmq6HQnQ0n4tzFu7Vcrl0N IF4KVh/r9UQUAmuH9uAqR8YTcuXRigcFWp7bV2lWkOvqPniOTCzfpFKAJPHwT8bQ 9Zxan8VWrzqxryuNtsxSGHY6PIPcILEeAPdU034oeuQoqhmAadAWO7BlOTp9KmQ6 QuwK+KlAbmtUzpQ+V9NbYML46DHr5TL6NCFWaOO9YyJnr8bl4Ah7aTXXjwCO3tJe B3pkFd2nwRvF22Wv1abFWEWOGBJa2oYcEmAJU6ThL3b8oFLFUTrvmQUXqye8vuG4 hbfttbNBqCy3N5r9d7lB =XkXL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --n/aVsWSeQ4JHkrmm--