On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Tony Lindgren <t...@atomide.com> wrote:
> * Ezequiel Garcia <elezegar...@gmail.com> [130122 10:17]:
>> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:32 PM, Daniel Mack <zon...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > I'm currently far away from my computer and can't prepare a patch for
>> > this, sorry. But I think you are right, so please just submit a patch for
>> > that, anyone :-)
>> >
>>
>> Ok, I'll try to submit a patch as soon as possible. If anyone wants to
>> do it instead, fine by me.
>
> No please go ahead as it seems that you can easily test it too.
>
No problem.
I now wonder if it's okey to exit upon probe failure.
In particular, the for_each should be like this:
for_each_node_by_name(child, "nand") {
ret = gpmc_probe_nand_child(pdev, child);
if (ret < 0) {
of_node_put(child);
return ret;
}
}
or like this:
for_each_node_by_name(child, "nand") {
ret = gpmc_probe_nand_child(pdev, child);
WARN_ON(ret < 0);
}
Ideas?
--
Ezequiel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
