Re: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/4] i2c: core: treat EPROBE_DEFER when acquiring SCL/SDA GPIOs

2020-08-03 Thread wsa
> > This is correct but I think the code flow is/was confusing. Can you drop > > this 'return' and use 'else if' for the next code block? I think this is > > more readable. > > Ok, it makes sense. Should I make a separate patch for this only? I am fine if this is included in this change. > One

Re: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/4] i2c: core: treat EPROBE_DEFER when acquiring SCL/SDA GPIOs

2020-08-03 Thread Codrin.Ciubotariu
On 02.08.2020 20:05, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 05:19:03PM +0300, Codrin Ciubotariu wrote: >> Even if I2C bus GPIO recovery is optional, devm_gpiod_get() can return >> -EPROBE_DEFER, so we should at least treat that. This ends up with >> i2c_register_adapter() to be able to

Re: [RFC PATCH 3/4] i2c: core: treat EPROBE_DEFER when acquiring SCL/SDA GPIOs

2020-08-02 Thread Wolfram Sang
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 05:19:03PM +0300, Codrin Ciubotariu wrote: > Even if I2C bus GPIO recovery is optional, devm_gpiod_get() can return > -EPROBE_DEFER, so we should at least treat that. This ends up with > i2c_register_adapter() to be able to return -EPROBE_DEFER. > > Signed-off-by: Codrin

[RFC PATCH 3/4] i2c: core: treat EPROBE_DEFER when acquiring SCL/SDA GPIOs

2020-06-19 Thread Codrin Ciubotariu
Even if I2C bus GPIO recovery is optional, devm_gpiod_get() can return -EPROBE_DEFER, so we should at least treat that. This ends up with i2c_register_adapter() to be able to return -EPROBE_DEFER. Signed-off-by: Codrin Ciubotariu --- drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c | 22 -- 1