On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 20:41, Keith Packard <keithp at keithp.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 19:07:51 -0200, Eugeni Dodonov <eugeni at dodonov.net> > wrote: > > > From what I've checked, the other return error value in this context > could > > be -EREMOTEIO, which could be caused by transmission error so it should > be > > retried. > > Oh, there's -ENOMEM, -EINVAL and probably a few others down in the > bowels of the kernel i2c bits. Starting with the obvious (ENXIO) seems > safest to me. > Yes, of course, but I was referring to the values which could be returned through the i2c-algo-bit call used in this edid detection call. -- Eugeni Dodonov <http://eugeni.dodonov.net/> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/attachments/20111017/d37c73a6/attachment.htm>
