From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758674Ab3BSQre (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Feb 2013 11:47:34 -0500 Received: from avon.wwwdotorg.org ([70.85.31.133]:55866 "EHLO avon.wwwdotorg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758462Ab3BSQrd (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Feb 2013 11:47:33 -0500 Message-ID: <5123ACA1.9000408@wwwdotorg.org> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:47:29 -0700 From: Stephen Warren User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130106 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Axel Lin CC: Mark Brown , 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 References: <1361015443.11226.1.camel@phoenix> In-Reply-To: <1361015443.11226.1.camel@phoenix> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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?