* GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2008-12-12 15:24 ` Ben Dooks
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Ben Dooks @ 2008-12-12 15:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel, linux-i2c, dbrownell; +Cc: Ben Dooks
[-- Attachment #1: simtec/check-gpio-driver-return-codes.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 3301 bytes --]
A number of drivers in drivers/gpio return -ENODEV when confronted
with missing setup parameters such as the platform data. However,
returning -ENODEV causes the driver layer to silently ignore the
driver as it assumes the probe did not find anything and was only
speculative.
To make life easier to discern why a driver is not being attached,
change to returning -EINVAL, which is a better description of the
fact that the driver data was not valid.
Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>
Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/max7301.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/max7301.c 2008-12-12 13:35:42.000000000 +0000
+++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/max7301.c 2008-12-12 13:36:12.000000000 +0000
@@ -218,7 +218,7 @@ static int __devinit max7301_probe(struc
pdata = spi->dev.platform_data;
if (!pdata || !pdata->base)
- return -ENODEV;
+ return -EINVAL;
/*
* bits_per_word cannot be configured in platform data
Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/max732x.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/max732x.c 2008-12-12 13:36:22.000000000 +0000
+++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/max732x.c 2008-12-12 13:36:28.000000000 +0000
@@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ static int __devinit max732x_probe(struc
pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
if (pdata == NULL)
- return -ENODEV;
+ return -EINVAL;
chip = kzalloc(sizeof(struct max732x_chip), GFP_KERNEL);
if (chip == NULL)
Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c 2008-12-12 14:10:01.000000000 +0000
+++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c 2008-12-12 14:11:19.000000000 +0000
@@ -311,7 +311,7 @@ static int mcp23s08_probe(struct spi_dev
pdata = spi->dev.platform_data;
if (!pdata || !gpio_is_valid(pdata->base))
- return -ENODEV;
+ return -EINVAL;
for (addr = 0; addr < 4; addr++) {
if (!pdata->chip[addr].is_present)
Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c 2008-12-12 13:33:47.000000000 +0000
+++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c 2008-12-12 13:33:55.000000000 +0000
@@ -201,7 +201,7 @@ static int __devinit pca953x_probe(struc
pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
if (pdata == NULL)
- return -ENODEV;
+ return -EINVAL;
chip = kzalloc(sizeof(struct pca953x_chip), GFP_KERNEL);
if (chip == NULL)
Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c 2008-12-12 13:34:33.000000000 +0000
+++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c 2008-12-12 13:34:54.000000000 +0000
@@ -189,7 +189,7 @@ static int pcf857x_probe(struct i2c_clie
pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
if (!pdata)
- return -ENODEV;
+ return -EINVAL;
/* Allocate, initialize, and register this gpio_chip. */
gpio = kzalloc(sizeof *gpio, GFP_KERNEL);
@@ -249,7 +249,7 @@ static int pcf857x_probe(struct i2c_clie
status = i2c_read_le16(client);
} else
- status = -ENODEV;
+ status = -EINVAL;
if (status < 0)
goto fail;
--
Ben (ben@fluff.org, http://www.fluff.org/)
'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2008-12-12 15:24 ` Ben Dooks
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Ben Dooks @ 2008-12-12 15:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA,
linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA,
dbrownell-Rn4VEauK+AKRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f
Cc: Ben Dooks
[-- Attachment #1: simtec/check-gpio-driver-return-codes.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 3361 bytes --]
A number of drivers in drivers/gpio return -ENODEV when confronted
with missing setup parameters such as the platform data. However,
returning -ENODEV causes the driver layer to silently ignore the
driver as it assumes the probe did not find anything and was only
speculative.
To make life easier to discern why a driver is not being attached,
change to returning -EINVAL, which is a better description of the
fact that the driver data was not valid.
Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben-linux-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>
Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/max7301.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/max7301.c 2008-12-12 13:35:42.000000000 +0000
+++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/max7301.c 2008-12-12 13:36:12.000000000 +0000
@@ -218,7 +218,7 @@ static int __devinit max7301_probe(struc
pdata = spi->dev.platform_data;
if (!pdata || !pdata->base)
- return -ENODEV;
+ return -EINVAL;
/*
* bits_per_word cannot be configured in platform data
Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/max732x.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/max732x.c 2008-12-12 13:36:22.000000000 +0000
+++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/max732x.c 2008-12-12 13:36:28.000000000 +0000
@@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ static int __devinit max732x_probe(struc
pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
if (pdata == NULL)
- return -ENODEV;
+ return -EINVAL;
chip = kzalloc(sizeof(struct max732x_chip), GFP_KERNEL);
if (chip == NULL)
Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c 2008-12-12 14:10:01.000000000 +0000
+++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c 2008-12-12 14:11:19.000000000 +0000
@@ -311,7 +311,7 @@ static int mcp23s08_probe(struct spi_dev
pdata = spi->dev.platform_data;
if (!pdata || !gpio_is_valid(pdata->base))
- return -ENODEV;
+ return -EINVAL;
for (addr = 0; addr < 4; addr++) {
if (!pdata->chip[addr].is_present)
Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c 2008-12-12 13:33:47.000000000 +0000
+++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c 2008-12-12 13:33:55.000000000 +0000
@@ -201,7 +201,7 @@ static int __devinit pca953x_probe(struc
pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
if (pdata == NULL)
- return -ENODEV;
+ return -EINVAL;
chip = kzalloc(sizeof(struct pca953x_chip), GFP_KERNEL);
if (chip == NULL)
Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c 2008-12-12 13:34:33.000000000 +0000
+++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c 2008-12-12 13:34:54.000000000 +0000
@@ -189,7 +189,7 @@ static int pcf857x_probe(struct i2c_clie
pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
if (!pdata)
- return -ENODEV;
+ return -EINVAL;
/* Allocate, initialize, and register this gpio_chip. */
gpio = kzalloc(sizeof *gpio, GFP_KERNEL);
@@ -249,7 +249,7 @@ static int pcf857x_probe(struct i2c_clie
status = i2c_read_le16(client);
} else
- status = -ENODEV;
+ status = -EINVAL;
if (status < 0)
goto fail;
--
Ben (ben-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, http://www.fluff.org/)
'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2008-12-14 21:33 ` Ben Dooks
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Ben Dooks @ 2008-12-14 21:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ben Dooks; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-i2c, dbrownell
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 03:24:27PM +0000, Ben Dooks wrote:
> A number of drivers in drivers/gpio return -ENODEV when confronted
> with missing setup parameters such as the platform data. However,
> returning -ENODEV causes the driver layer to silently ignore the
> driver as it assumes the probe did not find anything and was only
> speculative.
>
> To make life easier to discern why a driver is not being attached,
> change to returning -EINVAL, which is a better description of the
> fact that the driver data was not valid.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>
Has anyone reveiwed this patch? Are there any comments, or can this
be commited at somepoint (even if it is during the next merge window)?
> Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/max7301.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/max7301.c 2008-12-12 13:35:42.000000000 +0000
> +++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/max7301.c 2008-12-12 13:36:12.000000000 +0000
> @@ -218,7 +218,7 @@ static int __devinit max7301_probe(struc
>
> pdata = spi->dev.platform_data;
> if (!pdata || !pdata->base)
> - return -ENODEV;
> + return -EINVAL;
>
> /*
> * bits_per_word cannot be configured in platform data
> Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/max732x.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/max732x.c 2008-12-12 13:36:22.000000000 +0000
> +++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/max732x.c 2008-12-12 13:36:28.000000000 +0000
> @@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ static int __devinit max732x_probe(struc
>
> pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
> if (pdata == NULL)
> - return -ENODEV;
> + return -EINVAL;
>
> chip = kzalloc(sizeof(struct max732x_chip), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (chip == NULL)
> Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c 2008-12-12 14:10:01.000000000 +0000
> +++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c 2008-12-12 14:11:19.000000000 +0000
> @@ -311,7 +311,7 @@ static int mcp23s08_probe(struct spi_dev
>
> pdata = spi->dev.platform_data;
> if (!pdata || !gpio_is_valid(pdata->base))
> - return -ENODEV;
> + return -EINVAL;
>
> for (addr = 0; addr < 4; addr++) {
> if (!pdata->chip[addr].is_present)
> Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c 2008-12-12 13:33:47.000000000 +0000
> +++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c 2008-12-12 13:33:55.000000000 +0000
> @@ -201,7 +201,7 @@ static int __devinit pca953x_probe(struc
>
> pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
> if (pdata == NULL)
> - return -ENODEV;
> + return -EINVAL;
>
> chip = kzalloc(sizeof(struct pca953x_chip), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (chip == NULL)
> Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c 2008-12-12 13:34:33.000000000 +0000
> +++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c 2008-12-12 13:34:54.000000000 +0000
> @@ -189,7 +189,7 @@ static int pcf857x_probe(struct i2c_clie
>
> pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
> if (!pdata)
> - return -ENODEV;
> + return -EINVAL;
>
> /* Allocate, initialize, and register this gpio_chip. */
> gpio = kzalloc(sizeof *gpio, GFP_KERNEL);
> @@ -249,7 +249,7 @@ static int pcf857x_probe(struct i2c_clie
> status = i2c_read_le16(client);
>
> } else
> - status = -ENODEV;
> + status = -EINVAL;
>
> if (status < 0)
> goto fail;
>
> --
> Ben (ben@fluff.org, http://www.fluff.org/)
>
> 'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
Ben (ben@fluff.org, http://www.fluff.org/)
'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2008-12-14 21:33 ` Ben Dooks
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Ben Dooks @ 2008-12-14 21:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ben Dooks
Cc: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA,
linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA,
dbrownell-Rn4VEauK+AKRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 03:24:27PM +0000, Ben Dooks wrote:
> A number of drivers in drivers/gpio return -ENODEV when confronted
> with missing setup parameters such as the platform data. However,
> returning -ENODEV causes the driver layer to silently ignore the
> driver as it assumes the probe did not find anything and was only
> speculative.
>
> To make life easier to discern why a driver is not being attached,
> change to returning -EINVAL, which is a better description of the
> fact that the driver data was not valid.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben-linux-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>
Has anyone reveiwed this patch? Are there any comments, or can this
be commited at somepoint (even if it is during the next merge window)?
> Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/max7301.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/max7301.c 2008-12-12 13:35:42.000000000 +0000
> +++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/max7301.c 2008-12-12 13:36:12.000000000 +0000
> @@ -218,7 +218,7 @@ static int __devinit max7301_probe(struc
>
> pdata = spi->dev.platform_data;
> if (!pdata || !pdata->base)
> - return -ENODEV;
> + return -EINVAL;
>
> /*
> * bits_per_word cannot be configured in platform data
> Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/max732x.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/max732x.c 2008-12-12 13:36:22.000000000 +0000
> +++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/max732x.c 2008-12-12 13:36:28.000000000 +0000
> @@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ static int __devinit max732x_probe(struc
>
> pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
> if (pdata == NULL)
> - return -ENODEV;
> + return -EINVAL;
>
> chip = kzalloc(sizeof(struct max732x_chip), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (chip == NULL)
> Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c 2008-12-12 14:10:01.000000000 +0000
> +++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c 2008-12-12 14:11:19.000000000 +0000
> @@ -311,7 +311,7 @@ static int mcp23s08_probe(struct spi_dev
>
> pdata = spi->dev.platform_data;
> if (!pdata || !gpio_is_valid(pdata->base))
> - return -ENODEV;
> + return -EINVAL;
>
> for (addr = 0; addr < 4; addr++) {
> if (!pdata->chip[addr].is_present)
> Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c 2008-12-12 13:33:47.000000000 +0000
> +++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c 2008-12-12 13:33:55.000000000 +0000
> @@ -201,7 +201,7 @@ static int __devinit pca953x_probe(struc
>
> pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
> if (pdata == NULL)
> - return -ENODEV;
> + return -EINVAL;
>
> chip = kzalloc(sizeof(struct pca953x_chip), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (chip == NULL)
> Index: linux.git7/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.git7.orig/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c 2008-12-12 13:34:33.000000000 +0000
> +++ linux.git7/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c 2008-12-12 13:34:54.000000000 +0000
> @@ -189,7 +189,7 @@ static int pcf857x_probe(struct i2c_clie
>
> pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
> if (!pdata)
> - return -ENODEV;
> + return -EINVAL;
>
> /* Allocate, initialize, and register this gpio_chip. */
> gpio = kzalloc(sizeof *gpio, GFP_KERNEL);
> @@ -249,7 +249,7 @@ static int pcf857x_probe(struct i2c_clie
> status = i2c_read_le16(client);
>
> } else
> - status = -ENODEV;
> + status = -EINVAL;
>
> if (status < 0)
> goto fail;
>
> --
> Ben (ben-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, http://www.fluff.org/)
>
> 'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
Ben (ben-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, http://www.fluff.org/)
'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2008-12-15 0:11 ` David Brownell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: David Brownell @ 2008-12-15 0:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ben Dooks; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-i2c
On Sunday 14 December 2008, Ben Dooks wrote:
> Has anyone reveiwed this patch? Are there any comments, or can this
> be commited at somepoint (even if it is during the next merge window)?
I was thinking that -EINVAL is almost the least informative
diagnostic code possible, since so many places return it
that it's usually hard to find out *which* invalid parameter
triggered ...
Is there a less-overloaded code you could return?
I have no issue with the patch other than that.
- Dave
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2008-12-15 0:11 ` David Brownell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: David Brownell @ 2008-12-15 0:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ben Dooks
Cc: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
On Sunday 14 December 2008, Ben Dooks wrote:
> Has anyone reveiwed this patch? Are there any comments, or can this
> be commited at somepoint (even if it is during the next merge window)?
I was thinking that -EINVAL is almost the least informative
diagnostic code possible, since so many places return it
that it's usually hard to find out *which* invalid parameter
triggered ...
Is there a less-overloaded code you could return?
I have no issue with the patch other than that.
- Dave
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2008-12-15 7:46 ` Jean Delvare
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Jean Delvare @ 2008-12-15 7:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Brownell; +Cc: Ben Dooks, linux-kernel, linux-i2c
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 16:11:17 -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> On Sunday 14 December 2008, Ben Dooks wrote:
> > Has anyone reveiwed this patch? Are there any comments, or can this
> > be commited at somepoint (even if it is during the next merge window)?
>
> I was thinking that -EINVAL is almost the least informative
> diagnostic code possible, since so many places return it
> that it's usually hard to find out *which* invalid parameter
> triggered ...
>
> Is there a less-overloaded code you could return?
-EINVAL sounds right to me, all that's really missing is dev_dbg()
messages in the drivers to log what the exact problem was.
> I have no issue with the patch other than that.
--
Jean Delvare
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2008-12-15 7:46 ` Jean Delvare
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Jean Delvare @ 2008-12-15 7:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Brownell
Cc: Ben Dooks, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA,
linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 16:11:17 -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> On Sunday 14 December 2008, Ben Dooks wrote:
> > Has anyone reveiwed this patch? Are there any comments, or can this
> > be commited at somepoint (even if it is during the next merge window)?
>
> I was thinking that -EINVAL is almost the least informative
> diagnostic code possible, since so many places return it
> that it's usually hard to find out *which* invalid parameter
> triggered ...
>
> Is there a less-overloaded code you could return?
-EINVAL sounds right to me, all that's really missing is dev_dbg()
messages in the drivers to log what the exact problem was.
> I have no issue with the patch other than that.
--
Jean Delvare
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2008-12-15 10:15 ` Ben Dooks
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Ben Dooks @ 2008-12-15 10:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Brownell; +Cc: Ben Dooks, linux-kernel, linux-i2c
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 04:11:17PM -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> On Sunday 14 December 2008, Ben Dooks wrote:
> > Has anyone reveiwed this patch? Are there any comments, or can this
> > be commited at somepoint (even if it is during the next merge window)?
>
> I was thinking that -EINVAL is almost the least informative
> diagnostic code possible, since so many places return it
> that it's usually hard to find out *which* invalid parameter
> triggered ...
>
> Is there a less-overloaded code you could return?
The only other ones that I think would be close are:
ENOTSUP Operation not supported (POSIX.1)
EPROTO Protocol error (POSIX.1)
ENOENT No such file or directory
EFAULT Bad address
Feedback welcone.
> I have no issue with the patch other than that.
>
> - Dave
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
Ben (ben@fluff.org, http://www.fluff.org/)
'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2008-12-15 10:15 ` Ben Dooks
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Ben Dooks @ 2008-12-15 10:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Brownell
Cc: Ben Dooks, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA,
linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 04:11:17PM -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> On Sunday 14 December 2008, Ben Dooks wrote:
> > Has anyone reveiwed this patch? Are there any comments, or can this
> > be commited at somepoint (even if it is during the next merge window)?
>
> I was thinking that -EINVAL is almost the least informative
> diagnostic code possible, since so many places return it
> that it's usually hard to find out *which* invalid parameter
> triggered ...
>
> Is there a less-overloaded code you could return?
The only other ones that I think would be close are:
ENOTSUP Operation not supported (POSIX.1)
EPROTO Protocol error (POSIX.1)
ENOENT No such file or directory
EFAULT Bad address
Feedback welcone.
> I have no issue with the patch other than that.
>
> - Dave
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
Ben (ben-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, http://www.fluff.org/)
'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2008-12-15 10:16 ` Ben Dooks
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Ben Dooks @ 2008-12-15 10:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jean Delvare; +Cc: David Brownell, Ben Dooks, linux-kernel, linux-i2c
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 08:46:00AM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 16:11:17 -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> > On Sunday 14 December 2008, Ben Dooks wrote:
> > > Has anyone reveiwed this patch? Are there any comments, or can this
> > > be commited at somepoint (even if it is during the next merge window)?
> >
> > I was thinking that -EINVAL is almost the least informative
> > diagnostic code possible, since so many places return it
> > that it's usually hard to find out *which* invalid parameter
> > triggered ...
> >
> > Is there a less-overloaded code you could return?
>
> -EINVAL sounds right to me, all that's really missing is dev_dbg()
> messages in the drivers to log what the exact problem was.
It might be more acceptable to be dev_err(), that way it will get
printed no matter what debug options have been selected. If so, a
seperate patch is probably in order to make the change.
--
Ben (ben@fluff.org, http://www.fluff.org/)
'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2008-12-15 10:16 ` Ben Dooks
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Ben Dooks @ 2008-12-15 10:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jean Delvare
Cc: David Brownell, Ben Dooks, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA,
linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 08:46:00AM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 16:11:17 -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> > On Sunday 14 December 2008, Ben Dooks wrote:
> > > Has anyone reveiwed this patch? Are there any comments, or can this
> > > be commited at somepoint (even if it is during the next merge window)?
> >
> > I was thinking that -EINVAL is almost the least informative
> > diagnostic code possible, since so many places return it
> > that it's usually hard to find out *which* invalid parameter
> > triggered ...
> >
> > Is there a less-overloaded code you could return?
>
> -EINVAL sounds right to me, all that's really missing is dev_dbg()
> messages in the drivers to log what the exact problem was.
It might be more acceptable to be dev_err(), that way it will get
printed no matter what debug options have been selected. If so, a
seperate patch is probably in order to make the change.
--
Ben (ben-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, http://www.fluff.org/)
'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2008-12-15 10:22 ` Jean Delvare
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Jean Delvare @ 2008-12-15 10:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ben Dooks; +Cc: David Brownell, Ben Dooks, linux-kernel, linux-i2c
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 10:16:16 +0000, Ben Dooks wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 08:46:00AM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 16:11:17 -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> > > On Sunday 14 December 2008, Ben Dooks wrote:
> > > > Has anyone reveiwed this patch? Are there any comments, or can this
> > > > be commited at somepoint (even if it is during the next merge window)?
> > >
> > > I was thinking that -EINVAL is almost the least informative
> > > diagnostic code possible, since so many places return it
> > > that it's usually hard to find out *which* invalid parameter
> > > triggered ...
> > >
> > > Is there a less-overloaded code you could return?
> >
> > -EINVAL sounds right to me, all that's really missing is dev_dbg()
> > messages in the drivers to log what the exact problem was.
>
> It might be more acceptable to be dev_err(), that way it will get
> printed no matter what debug options have been selected. If so, a
> seperate patch is probably in order to make the change.
As far as I can see, such errors would be caused by development-time
mistakes, so dev_dbg() seems appropriate. dev_err() would make the
binaries larger for all end-users.
--
Jean Delvare
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2008-12-15 10:22 ` Jean Delvare
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Jean Delvare @ 2008-12-15 10:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: David Brownell, Ben Dooks, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA,
linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 10:16:16 +0000, Ben Dooks wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 08:46:00AM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 16:11:17 -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> > > On Sunday 14 December 2008, Ben Dooks wrote:
> > > > Has anyone reveiwed this patch? Are there any comments, or can this
> > > > be commited at somepoint (even if it is during the next merge window)?
> > >
> > > I was thinking that -EINVAL is almost the least informative
> > > diagnostic code possible, since so many places return it
> > > that it's usually hard to find out *which* invalid parameter
> > > triggered ...
> > >
> > > Is there a less-overloaded code you could return?
> >
> > -EINVAL sounds right to me, all that's really missing is dev_dbg()
> > messages in the drivers to log what the exact problem was.
>
> It might be more acceptable to be dev_err(), that way it will get
> printed no matter what debug options have been selected. If so, a
> seperate patch is probably in order to make the change.
As far as I can see, such errors would be caused by development-time
mistakes, so dev_dbg() seems appropriate. dev_err() would make the
binaries larger for all end-users.
--
Jean Delvare
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2008-12-18 18:16 ` David Brownell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: David Brownell @ 2008-12-18 18:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jean Delvare, Ben Dooks; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-i2c
On Monday 15 December 2008, Jean Delvare wrote:
>
> > > > I was thinking that -EINVAL is almost the least informative
> > > > diagnostic code possible, since so many places return it
> > > > that it's usually hard to find out *which* invalid parameter
> > > > triggered ...
> > > >
> > > > Is there a less-overloaded code you could return?
> > >
> > > -EINVAL sounds right to me, all that's really missing is dev_dbg()
> > > messages in the drivers to log what the exact problem was.
Fair enough, though it just papers over how ambiguous -EINVAL is.
> > It might be more acceptable to be dev_err(), that way it will get
> > printed no matter what debug options have been selected. If so, a
> > seperate patch is probably in order to make the change.
>
> As far as I can see, such errors would be caused by development-time
> mistakes, so dev_dbg() seems appropriate. dev_err() would make the
> binaries larger for all end-users.
Right, dev_dbg() is the way to go. I'd ack a version of this patch
which pairs these -EINVAL changes with dev_dbg() messages to make
these problems less painful to track down. dev_err() is much abused.
- Dave
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2008-12-18 18:16 ` David Brownell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: David Brownell @ 2008-12-18 18:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jean Delvare, Ben Dooks
Cc: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA, linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
On Monday 15 December 2008, Jean Delvare wrote:
>
> > > > I was thinking that -EINVAL is almost the least informative
> > > > diagnostic code possible, since so many places return it
> > > > that it's usually hard to find out *which* invalid parameter
> > > > triggered ...
> > > >
> > > > Is there a less-overloaded code you could return?
> > >
> > > -EINVAL sounds right to me, all that's really missing is dev_dbg()
> > > messages in the drivers to log what the exact problem was.
Fair enough, though it just papers over how ambiguous -EINVAL is.
> > It might be more acceptable to be dev_err(), that way it will get
> > printed no matter what debug options have been selected. If so, a
> > seperate patch is probably in order to make the change.
>
> As far as I can see, such errors would be caused by development-time
> mistakes, so dev_dbg() seems appropriate. dev_err() would make the
> binaries larger for all end-users.
Right, dev_dbg() is the way to go. I'd ack a version of this patch
which pairs these -EINVAL changes with dev_dbg() messages to make
these problems less painful to track down. dev_err() is much abused.
- Dave
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2008-12-18 22:29 ` Ben Dooks
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Ben Dooks @ 2008-12-18 22:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Brownell; +Cc: Jean Delvare, Ben Dooks, linux-kernel, linux-i2c
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 10:16:27AM -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> On Monday 15 December 2008, Jean Delvare wrote:
> >
> > > > > I was thinking that -EINVAL is almost the least informative
> > > > > diagnostic code possible, since so many places return it
> > > > > that it's usually hard to find out *which* invalid parameter
> > > > > triggered ...
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there a less-overloaded code you could return?
> > > >
> > > > -EINVAL sounds right to me, all that's really missing is dev_dbg()
> > > > messages in the drivers to log what the exact problem was.
>
> Fair enough, though it just papers over how ambiguous -EINVAL is.
Unforunately there's not a lot of choice in errno.h for other options.
> > > It might be more acceptable to be dev_err(), that way it will get
> > > printed no matter what debug options have been selected. If so, a
> > > seperate patch is probably in order to make the change.
> >
> > As far as I can see, such errors would be caused by development-time
> > mistakes, so dev_dbg() seems appropriate. dev_err() would make the
> > binaries larger for all end-users.
>
> Right, dev_dbg() is the way to go. I'd ack a version of this patch
> which pairs these -EINVAL changes with dev_dbg() messages to make
> these problems less painful to track down. dev_err() is much abused.
Ok, I'll try and sort that out for you as soon as possible.
--
Ben (ben@fluff.org, http://www.fluff.org/)
'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2008-12-18 22:29 ` Ben Dooks
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Ben Dooks @ 2008-12-18 22:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Brownell
Cc: Jean Delvare, Ben Dooks, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA,
linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 10:16:27AM -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> On Monday 15 December 2008, Jean Delvare wrote:
> >
> > > > > I was thinking that -EINVAL is almost the least informative
> > > > > diagnostic code possible, since so many places return it
> > > > > that it's usually hard to find out *which* invalid parameter
> > > > > triggered ...
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there a less-overloaded code you could return?
> > > >
> > > > -EINVAL sounds right to me, all that's really missing is dev_dbg()
> > > > messages in the drivers to log what the exact problem was.
>
> Fair enough, though it just papers over how ambiguous -EINVAL is.
Unforunately there's not a lot of choice in errno.h for other options.
> > > It might be more acceptable to be dev_err(), that way it will get
> > > printed no matter what debug options have been selected. If so, a
> > > seperate patch is probably in order to make the change.
> >
> > As far as I can see, such errors would be caused by development-time
> > mistakes, so dev_dbg() seems appropriate. dev_err() would make the
> > binaries larger for all end-users.
>
> Right, dev_dbg() is the way to go. I'd ack a version of this patch
> which pairs these -EINVAL changes with dev_dbg() messages to make
> these problems less painful to track down. dev_err() is much abused.
Ok, I'll try and sort that out for you as soon as possible.
--
Ben (ben-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, http://www.fluff.org/)
'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2009-01-08 12:20 ` Ben Dooks
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Ben Dooks @ 2009-01-08 12:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel; +Cc: david-b, linux-i2c, spi-devel-general, Ben Dooks
On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 12:56:19PM +0000, ben@fluff.org.uk wrote:
> A number of drivers in drivers/gpio return -ENODEV when confronted
> with missing setup parameters such as the platform data. However,
> returning -ENODEV causes the driver layer to silently ignore the
> driver as it assumes the probe did not find anything and was only
> speculative.
>
> To make life easier to discern why a driver is not being attached,
> change to returning -EINVAL, which is a better description of the
> fact that the driver data was not valid.
>
> Also add a set of dev_dbg() statements to the error paths to provide
> an better explanation of the error as there may be more that one point
> in the driver.
sorry, sent from the wrong email address please ignore.
--
Ben (ben@fluff.org, http://www.fluff.org/)
'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2009-01-08 12:20 ` Ben Dooks
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Ben Dooks @ 2009-01-08 12:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
Cc: david-b-yBeKhBN/0LDR7s880joybQ, linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA,
spi-devel-general-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f, Ben Dooks
On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 12:56:19PM +0000, ben-elnMNo+KYs3pIgCt6eIbzw@public.gmane.org wrote:
> A number of drivers in drivers/gpio return -ENODEV when confronted
> with missing setup parameters such as the platform data. However,
> returning -ENODEV causes the driver layer to silently ignore the
> driver as it assumes the probe did not find anything and was only
> speculative.
>
> To make life easier to discern why a driver is not being attached,
> change to returning -EINVAL, which is a better description of the
> fact that the driver data was not valid.
>
> Also add a set of dev_dbg() statements to the error paths to provide
> an better explanation of the error as there may be more that one point
> in the driver.
sorry, sent from the wrong email address please ignore.
--
Ben (ben-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, http://www.fluff.org/)
'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2009-01-07 13:03 Ben Dooks
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Ben Dooks @ 2009-01-07 13:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel; +Cc: david-b, linux-i2c, spi-devel-general, Ben Dooks
[-- Attachment #1: simtec/check-gpio-driver-return-codes.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 4055 bytes --]
A number of drivers in drivers/gpio return -ENODEV when confronted
with missing setup parameters such as the platform data. However,
returning -ENODEV causes the driver layer to silently ignore the
driver as it assumes the probe did not find anything and was only
speculative.
To make life easier to discern why a driver is not being attached,
change to returning -EINVAL, which is a better description of the
fact that the driver data was not valid.
Also add a set of dev_dbg() statements to the error paths to provide
an better explanation of the error as there may be more that one point
in the driver.
Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>
Index: linux.git3/drivers/gpio/max7301.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git3.orig/drivers/gpio/max7301.c 2008-10-22 09:50:45.000000000 +0100
+++ linux.git3/drivers/gpio/max7301.c 2009-01-07 12:37:46.000000000 +0000
@@ -217,8 +217,10 @@ static int __devinit max7301_probe(struc
int i, ret;
pdata = spi->dev.platform_data;
- if (!pdata || !pdata->base)
- return -ENODEV;
+ if (!pdata || !pdata->base) {
+ dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "incorrect or missing platform data\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
/*
* bits_per_word cannot be configured in platform data
Index: linux.git3/drivers/gpio/max732x.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git3.orig/drivers/gpio/max732x.c 2008-10-22 09:50:45.000000000 +0100
+++ linux.git3/drivers/gpio/max732x.c 2009-01-07 12:22:10.000000000 +0000
@@ -267,8 +267,10 @@ static int __devinit max732x_probe(struc
int ret, nr_port;
pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
- if (pdata == NULL)
- return -ENODEV;
+ if (pdata == NULL) {
+ dev_dbg(&client->dev, "no platform data\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
chip = kzalloc(sizeof(struct max732x_chip), GFP_KERNEL);
if (chip == NULL)
Index: linux.git3/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git3.orig/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c 2008-10-22 09:50:45.000000000 +0100
+++ linux.git3/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c 2009-01-07 12:23:24.000000000 +0000
@@ -310,8 +310,10 @@ static int mcp23s08_probe(struct spi_dev
unsigned base;
pdata = spi->dev.platform_data;
- if (!pdata || !gpio_is_valid(pdata->base))
- return -ENODEV;
+ if (!pdata || !gpio_is_valid(pdata->base)) {
+ dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "invalid or missing platform data\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
for (addr = 0; addr < 4; addr++) {
if (!pdata->chip[addr].is_present)
Index: linux.git3/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git3.orig/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c 2008-10-22 09:50:45.000000000 +0100
+++ linux.git3/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c 2009-01-07 12:36:00.000000000 +0000
@@ -200,8 +200,10 @@ static int __devinit pca953x_probe(struc
int ret;
pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
- if (pdata == NULL)
- return -ENODEV;
+ if (pdata == NULL) {
+ dev_dbg(&client->dev, "no platform data\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
chip = kzalloc(sizeof(struct pca953x_chip), GFP_KERNEL);
if (chip == NULL)
Index: linux.git3/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git3.orig/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c 2008-10-22 09:50:45.000000000 +0100
+++ linux.git3/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c 2009-01-07 12:27:00.000000000 +0000
@@ -188,8 +188,10 @@ static int pcf857x_probe(struct i2c_clie
int status;
pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
- if (!pdata)
- return -ENODEV;
+ if (!pdata) {
+ dev_dbg(&client->dev, "no platform data\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
/* Allocate, initialize, and register this gpio_chip. */
gpio = kzalloc(sizeof *gpio, GFP_KERNEL);
@@ -248,8 +250,10 @@ static int pcf857x_probe(struct i2c_clie
else
status = i2c_read_le16(client);
- } else
- status = -ENODEV;
+ } else {
+ dev_dbg(&client->dev, "unsupported number of gpios\n");
+ status = -EINVAL;
+ }
if (status < 0)
goto fail;
--
Ben (ben@fluff.org, http://www.fluff.org/)
'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2009-01-07 12:56 ` ben-elnMNo+KYs3pIgCt6eIbzw
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: ben @ 2009-01-07 12:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel; +Cc: david-b, linux-i2c, spi-devel-general, Ben Dooks
[-- Attachment #1: simtec/check-gpio-driver-return-codes.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 4055 bytes --]
A number of drivers in drivers/gpio return -ENODEV when confronted
with missing setup parameters such as the platform data. However,
returning -ENODEV causes the driver layer to silently ignore the
driver as it assumes the probe did not find anything and was only
speculative.
To make life easier to discern why a driver is not being attached,
change to returning -EINVAL, which is a better description of the
fact that the driver data was not valid.
Also add a set of dev_dbg() statements to the error paths to provide
an better explanation of the error as there may be more that one point
in the driver.
Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>
Index: linux.git3/drivers/gpio/max7301.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git3.orig/drivers/gpio/max7301.c 2008-10-22 09:50:45.000000000 +0100
+++ linux.git3/drivers/gpio/max7301.c 2009-01-07 12:37:46.000000000 +0000
@@ -217,8 +217,10 @@ static int __devinit max7301_probe(struc
int i, ret;
pdata = spi->dev.platform_data;
- if (!pdata || !pdata->base)
- return -ENODEV;
+ if (!pdata || !pdata->base) {
+ dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "incorrect or missing platform data\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
/*
* bits_per_word cannot be configured in platform data
Index: linux.git3/drivers/gpio/max732x.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git3.orig/drivers/gpio/max732x.c 2008-10-22 09:50:45.000000000 +0100
+++ linux.git3/drivers/gpio/max732x.c 2009-01-07 12:22:10.000000000 +0000
@@ -267,8 +267,10 @@ static int __devinit max732x_probe(struc
int ret, nr_port;
pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
- if (pdata == NULL)
- return -ENODEV;
+ if (pdata == NULL) {
+ dev_dbg(&client->dev, "no platform data\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
chip = kzalloc(sizeof(struct max732x_chip), GFP_KERNEL);
if (chip == NULL)
Index: linux.git3/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git3.orig/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c 2008-10-22 09:50:45.000000000 +0100
+++ linux.git3/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c 2009-01-07 12:23:24.000000000 +0000
@@ -310,8 +310,10 @@ static int mcp23s08_probe(struct spi_dev
unsigned base;
pdata = spi->dev.platform_data;
- if (!pdata || !gpio_is_valid(pdata->base))
- return -ENODEV;
+ if (!pdata || !gpio_is_valid(pdata->base)) {
+ dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "invalid or missing platform data\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
for (addr = 0; addr < 4; addr++) {
if (!pdata->chip[addr].is_present)
Index: linux.git3/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git3.orig/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c 2008-10-22 09:50:45.000000000 +0100
+++ linux.git3/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c 2009-01-07 12:36:00.000000000 +0000
@@ -200,8 +200,10 @@ static int __devinit pca953x_probe(struc
int ret;
pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
- if (pdata == NULL)
- return -ENODEV;
+ if (pdata == NULL) {
+ dev_dbg(&client->dev, "no platform data\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
chip = kzalloc(sizeof(struct pca953x_chip), GFP_KERNEL);
if (chip == NULL)
Index: linux.git3/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git3.orig/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c 2008-10-22 09:50:45.000000000 +0100
+++ linux.git3/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c 2009-01-07 12:27:00.000000000 +0000
@@ -188,8 +188,10 @@ static int pcf857x_probe(struct i2c_clie
int status;
pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
- if (!pdata)
- return -ENODEV;
+ if (!pdata) {
+ dev_dbg(&client->dev, "no platform data\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
/* Allocate, initialize, and register this gpio_chip. */
gpio = kzalloc(sizeof *gpio, GFP_KERNEL);
@@ -248,8 +250,10 @@ static int pcf857x_probe(struct i2c_clie
else
status = i2c_read_le16(client);
- } else
- status = -ENODEV;
+ } else {
+ dev_dbg(&client->dev, "unsupported number of gpios\n");
+ status = -EINVAL;
+ }
if (status < 0)
goto fail;
--
Ben (ben@fluff.org, http://www.fluff.org/)
'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes
@ 2009-01-07 12:56 ` ben-elnMNo+KYs3pIgCt6eIbzw
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: ben-elnMNo+KYs3pIgCt6eIbzw @ 2009-01-07 12:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
Cc: david-b-yBeKhBN/0LDR7s880joybQ, linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA,
spi-devel-general-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f, Ben Dooks
[-- Attachment #1: simtec/check-gpio-driver-return-codes.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 4115 bytes --]
A number of drivers in drivers/gpio return -ENODEV when confronted
with missing setup parameters such as the platform data. However,
returning -ENODEV causes the driver layer to silently ignore the
driver as it assumes the probe did not find anything and was only
speculative.
To make life easier to discern why a driver is not being attached,
change to returning -EINVAL, which is a better description of the
fact that the driver data was not valid.
Also add a set of dev_dbg() statements to the error paths to provide
an better explanation of the error as there may be more that one point
in the driver.
Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben-linux-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>
Index: linux.git3/drivers/gpio/max7301.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git3.orig/drivers/gpio/max7301.c 2008-10-22 09:50:45.000000000 +0100
+++ linux.git3/drivers/gpio/max7301.c 2009-01-07 12:37:46.000000000 +0000
@@ -217,8 +217,10 @@ static int __devinit max7301_probe(struc
int i, ret;
pdata = spi->dev.platform_data;
- if (!pdata || !pdata->base)
- return -ENODEV;
+ if (!pdata || !pdata->base) {
+ dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "incorrect or missing platform data\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
/*
* bits_per_word cannot be configured in platform data
Index: linux.git3/drivers/gpio/max732x.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git3.orig/drivers/gpio/max732x.c 2008-10-22 09:50:45.000000000 +0100
+++ linux.git3/drivers/gpio/max732x.c 2009-01-07 12:22:10.000000000 +0000
@@ -267,8 +267,10 @@ static int __devinit max732x_probe(struc
int ret, nr_port;
pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
- if (pdata == NULL)
- return -ENODEV;
+ if (pdata == NULL) {
+ dev_dbg(&client->dev, "no platform data\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
chip = kzalloc(sizeof(struct max732x_chip), GFP_KERNEL);
if (chip == NULL)
Index: linux.git3/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git3.orig/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c 2008-10-22 09:50:45.000000000 +0100
+++ linux.git3/drivers/gpio/mcp23s08.c 2009-01-07 12:23:24.000000000 +0000
@@ -310,8 +310,10 @@ static int mcp23s08_probe(struct spi_dev
unsigned base;
pdata = spi->dev.platform_data;
- if (!pdata || !gpio_is_valid(pdata->base))
- return -ENODEV;
+ if (!pdata || !gpio_is_valid(pdata->base)) {
+ dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "invalid or missing platform data\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
for (addr = 0; addr < 4; addr++) {
if (!pdata->chip[addr].is_present)
Index: linux.git3/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git3.orig/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c 2008-10-22 09:50:45.000000000 +0100
+++ linux.git3/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c 2009-01-07 12:36:00.000000000 +0000
@@ -200,8 +200,10 @@ static int __devinit pca953x_probe(struc
int ret;
pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
- if (pdata == NULL)
- return -ENODEV;
+ if (pdata == NULL) {
+ dev_dbg(&client->dev, "no platform data\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
chip = kzalloc(sizeof(struct pca953x_chip), GFP_KERNEL);
if (chip == NULL)
Index: linux.git3/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c
===================================================================
--- linux.git3.orig/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c 2008-10-22 09:50:45.000000000 +0100
+++ linux.git3/drivers/gpio/pcf857x.c 2009-01-07 12:27:00.000000000 +0000
@@ -188,8 +188,10 @@ static int pcf857x_probe(struct i2c_clie
int status;
pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
- if (!pdata)
- return -ENODEV;
+ if (!pdata) {
+ dev_dbg(&client->dev, "no platform data\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
/* Allocate, initialize, and register this gpio_chip. */
gpio = kzalloc(sizeof *gpio, GFP_KERNEL);
@@ -248,8 +250,10 @@ static int pcf857x_probe(struct i2c_clie
else
status = i2c_read_le16(client);
- } else
- status = -ENODEV;
+ } else {
+ dev_dbg(&client->dev, "unsupported number of gpios\n");
+ status = -EINVAL;
+ }
if (status < 0)
goto fail;
--
Ben (ben-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, http://www.fluff.org/)
'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-01-08 12:20 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-12-12 15:24 GPIO: Fix probe() error return in gpio driver probes Ben Dooks
2008-12-12 15:24 ` Ben Dooks
2008-12-14 21:33 ` Ben Dooks
2008-12-14 21:33 ` Ben Dooks
2008-12-15 0:11 ` David Brownell
2008-12-15 0:11 ` David Brownell
2008-12-15 7:46 ` Jean Delvare
2008-12-15 7:46 ` Jean Delvare
2008-12-15 10:16 ` Ben Dooks
2008-12-15 10:16 ` Ben Dooks
2008-12-15 10:22 ` Jean Delvare
2008-12-15 10:22 ` Jean Delvare
2008-12-18 18:16 ` David Brownell
2008-12-18 18:16 ` David Brownell
2008-12-18 22:29 ` Ben Dooks
2008-12-18 22:29 ` Ben Dooks
2008-12-15 10:15 ` Ben Dooks
2008-12-15 10:15 ` Ben Dooks
2009-01-07 12:56 ben
2009-01-07 12:56 ` ben-elnMNo+KYs3pIgCt6eIbzw
2009-01-08 12:20 ` Ben Dooks
2009-01-08 12:20 ` Ben Dooks
2009-01-07 13:03 Ben Dooks
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.