[PATCH 4/4] PM / Domains: Let the ->attach_dev() callback return an error code
Ulf Hansson
ulf.hansson at linaro.org
Thu Oct 30 04:34:19 PDT 2014
On 29 October 2014 22:10, Kevin Hilman <khilman at kernel.org> wrote:
> Geert Uytterhoeven <geert at linux-m68k.org> writes:
>
>> Hi Ulf, Rafael,
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson at linaro.org> wrote:
>>> Typically an ->attach_dev() callback would fetch some PM resourses.
>>>
>>> Those operations, like for example clk_get() may fail with different
>>> errors, including -EPROBE_DEFER. Instead of ignoring these errors and
>>> potentially only print an error message, let's propagate them to give
>>> callers the option to handle them.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson at linaro.org>
>>
>> Given that several patch series using ->attach_dev() are already floating
>> around and will be in -next soon, what is the plan of getting this in?
>
> Shall we take this as a Reviewed-by or Acked-by for the series? :)
>
>> Doing it ASAP (in v3.18-rc3)?
>
> IMO, this isn't at all appropriate for -rc since it's not fixing a
> regression. Also, this series includes other cleanups that are not
> really fixes either. At this point of the -rc cycle, we need to focus
> only on regression fixes.
>
>> Delaying this to v3.19-rc2, which will require an atomic fixing of its users?
>> Any other option?
>
> I don't see any users of this in -next yet, so I think doing a simple
> patch to the prototype and fixing up any users before they hit -next is
> the right approach. Errors will be ignored, but that's not change from
> today. :)
>
> Then the rest of this cleanup and behavior change stuff can continue to
> be reviewed and get broader testing before merge.
Okay, I will follow your suggestions and send a patch that only change
the prototype, intended as a fix for rc[n].
Kind regards
Uffe
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list