On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 01:02:52PM -0400, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Guenter, > > On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 10:57:53 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > Sibyte i2c bus driver returns non-descriptive error values. > > Update to return error values as defined in Documentation/i2c/fault-codes. > > > > Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <[email protected]> > > --- > > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-sibyte.c | 4 ++-- > > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-sibyte.c > > b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-sibyte.c > > index 3d76a18..329cbee 100644 > > --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-sibyte.c > > +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-sibyte.c > > @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ static int smbus_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *i2c_adap, u16 > > addr, > > } > > break; > > default: > > - return -1; /* XXXKW better error code? */ > > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > > } > > > > while (csr_in32(SMB_CSR(adap, R_SMB_STATUS)) & M_SMB_BUSY) > > @@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ static int smbus_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *i2c_adap, u16 > > addr, > > if (error & M_SMB_ERROR) { > > /* Clear error bit by writing a 1 */ > > csr_out32(M_SMB_ERROR, SMB_CSR(adap, R_SMB_STATUS)); > > - return -1; /* XXXKW better error code? */ > > + return -ENXIO; > > } > > > > if (data_bytes == 1) > > Definitely an improvement. However, returning -ENXIO on all errors > seems wrong. This error value should only be returned on missing ack > from the slave on address byte. Isn't it possible to distinguish > between different error kinds? M_SMB_ERROR_TYPE seems promising, but > one would need to look up the datasheet (which I don't have) to > discover its meaning. > Makes sense. I'll dig up a copy of the datasheet and see if I can improve it.
Guenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
