On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 12:58:12PM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> From: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.viz...@collabora.com>
>
> So that callers of cros_ec_cmd_xfer don't have to repeat boilerplate
> code when checking for errors from the EC side.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.viz...@collabora.com>
> Reviewed-by: Benson Leung <ble...@chromium.org>
> Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <briannor...@chromium.org>
> Acked-by: Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org>
> Tested-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balle...@collabora.com>
> ---
> v3:
> * successfully spell success
>
> v2:
> * no change
> ---
> drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
> include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 33 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c
> b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c
> index b6e161f71b26..ecc544c728f0 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c
> @@ -380,3 +380,18 @@ int cros_ec_cmd_xfer(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev,
> return ret;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(cros_ec_cmd_xfer);
> +
> +int cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev,
> + struct cros_ec_command *msg)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = cros_ec_cmd_xfer(ec_dev, msg);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + dev_err(ec_dev->dev, "Command xfer error (err:%d)\n", ret);
> + else if (msg->result != EC_RES_SUCCESS)
> + return -EECRESULT - msg->result;
I have been wondering about the error return codes here, and if they should be
converted to standard Linux error codes. For example, I just hit error -1003
with a driver I am working on. This translates to EC_RES_INVALID_PARAM, or,
in Linux terms, -EINVAL. I think it would be better to use standard error
codes, especially since some of the errors are logged.
Guenter
