On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 1:50 PM Brian Norris <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 3:19 AM Enric Balletbo i Serra > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi Brian, > > > > Thank you for your patch, I'll take a look soon but I'd like to ask if you > > can > > join the discussion with this patchset [1], specially this one [2]. We're > > trying > > to match EC errors with standard linux kernel errors because we think can be > > helpful. > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/cover/1276734/ > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1276738/ > > Hi Enric, > > Thanks, I'll do that. I do wonder sometimes how non-maintainers should > best support "community" around these things, for subsystems that > don't have a dedicated mailing list and are therefore sent only to > maintainers + LKML-fire-hose. I could probably subscribe to LKML and > filter it, but something tells me my mailbox will still manage to > explode somehow... Anyway, I digress. > > Other than perhaps taking a lesson not to propagate -ENOTSUPP, I don't > think this series should block on that, as this is a bugfix IMO. >
My patch will return -EOPNOTSUPP for EC_RES_INVALID_COMMAND, so maybe you could do the same. In my latest version (not yet submitted) I extracted the conversion into a separate function, so if your patch is accepted now I can just add another patch on top of it to start using that function. Thanks, Guenter
