On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 11:31 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
On Sat, 04 Apr 2009 08:46:00 -0400, Andy Walls wrote:
On Sat, 2009-04-04 at 14:26 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
* Return actual error values as returned by the i2c subsystem, rather
than 0 or 1.
* If the registration of the second
On Sat, 04 Apr 2009 08:46:00 -0400, Andy Walls wrote:
On Sat, 2009-04-04 at 14:26 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
* Return actual error values as returned by the i2c subsystem, rather
than 0 or 1.
* If the registration of the second bus fails, unregister the first one
before exiting,
On Sat, 2009-04-04 at 14:26 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
* Return actual error values as returned by the i2c subsystem, rather
than 0 or 1.
* If the registration of the second bus fails, unregister the first one
before exiting, otherwise we are leaking resources.
Signed-off-by: Jean
Hi Andy,
Thanks for the fast review.
On Sat, 04 Apr 2009 08:46:00 -0400, Andy Walls wrote:
On Sat, 2009-04-04 at 14:26 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
* Return actual error values as returned by the i2c subsystem, rather
than 0 or 1.
* If the registration of the second bus fails, unregister
On Sat, 2009-04-04 at 16:23 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
Hi Andy,
Thanks for the fast review.
On Sat, 04 Apr 2009 08:46:00 -0400, Andy Walls wrote:
Correct, actually my initial attempt looked like this. But then patch
3/6 adds code, which makes your solution 2 lines bigger, while my
