于 2014年01月29日 08:13, David Cohen 写道:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 12:12:06PM -0600, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 09:24:13AM -0800, David Cohen wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 10:49:37AM -0600, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 04:50:57PM +0800, xinhui.pan wrote:
>>>>> From: "xinhui.pan" <xinhuix....@intel.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> intel_gpio_runtime_idle should return correct error code if it do fail.
>>>>> make it more correct even though -EBUSY is the most possible return value.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: bo.he <bo...@intel.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: xinhui.pan <xinhuix....@intel.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> drivers/gpio/gpio-intel-mid.c | 4 +++-
>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-intel-mid.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-intel-mid.c
>>>>> index d1b50ef..05749a3 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-intel-mid.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-intel-mid.c
>>>>> @@ -394,7 +394,9 @@ static const struct irq_domain_ops intel_gpio_irq_ops
>>>>> = {
>>>>>
>>>>> static int intel_gpio_runtime_idle(struct device *dev)
>>>>> {
>>>>> - pm_schedule_suspend(dev, 500);
>>>>> + int err = pm_schedule_suspend(dev, 500);
>>>>> + if (err)
>>>>> + return err;
>>>>> return -EBUSY;
>>>>
>>>> wait, is it only me or this would look a lot better as:
>>>>
>>>> static int intel_gpio_runtime_idle(struct device *dev)
>>>> {
>>>> return pm_schedule_suspend(dev, 500);
>>>> }
>>>
>>> The reply to your suggestion is probably in this commit :)
>>>
>>> ---
>>> commit 45f0a85c8258741d11bda25c0a5669c06267204a
>>> Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com>
>>> Date: Mon Jun 3 21:49:52 2013 +0200
>>>
>>> PM / Runtime: Rework the "runtime idle" helper routine
>>> ---
>>>
>>> We won't return 0 from here.
>>
>> so you never want to return 0, why don't you, then:
>>
>> static int intel_gpio_runtime_idle(struct device *dev)
>> {
>> pm_schedule_suspend(dev, 500);
>> return -EBUSY;
>> }
>
> That's how it is currently :)
>
> But this patch is making the function to return a different code in case
> of error. IMHO there is not much fuctional gain with it, but I see
> perhaps one extra info for tracing during development.
>
> Anyway, I'll let Xinhui to do further comment since he's the author.
>
> Br, David
>
hi ,David & Balbi
I checked several drivers yesterday to see how they use pm_schedule_suspend
then found one bug in i2c. Also I noticed gpio.
I think returning a correct error code is important.So I change -EBUSY
to *err*. To be honest,current code works well.
>>
>> just like drivers/tty/serial/mfd.c::serial_hsu_runtime_idle() is doing ?
>>
>> --
>> balbi
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
