pt., 15 lut 2019 o 11:26 Srinivas Kandagatla
napisał(a):
>
>
>
> On 15/02/2019 09:41, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> >> rval will be masked with STOP MASK, so the above statement could be
> >> false even if we have error.
> >> So you should consider returning an errono which can be understood by
On 15/02/2019 09:41, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
rval will be masked with STOP MASK, so the above statement could be
false even if we have error.
So you should consider returning an errono which can be understood by user:
may be something like this:
if (rval & NOTIFY_STOP_MASK) {
pt., 15 lut 2019 o 10:28 Srinivas Kandagatla
napisał(a):
>
>
>
> On 14/02/2019 16:23, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/core.c b/drivers/nvmem/core.c
> > index f7301bb4ef3b..a3bed2d9aec7 100644
> > --- a/drivers/nvmem/core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/nvmem/core.c
> > @@ -687,7
On 14/02/2019 16:23, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/core.c b/drivers/nvmem/core.c
index f7301bb4ef3b..a3bed2d9aec7 100644
--- a/drivers/nvmem/core.c
+++ b/drivers/nvmem/core.c
@@ -687,7 +687,7 @@ struct nvmem_device *nvmem_register(const struct
nvmem_config *config)
From: Bartosz Golaszewski
blocking_notifier_call_chain() returns the value returned by the last
registered callback. A positive return value doesn't indicate an error
so check only if it's negative.
Fixes: bee1138bea15 ("nvmem: add a notifier chain")
Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by:
5 matches
Mail list logo