On Thu, 2017-04-13 at 18:43 +0200, Peter Rosin wrote: [...] > +int mux_chip_register(struct mux_chip *mux_chip) > +{ > + int i; > + int ret; > + > + for (i = 0; i < mux_chip->controllers; ++i) { > + struct mux_control *mux = &mux_chip->mux[i]; > + > + if (mux->idle_state == mux->cached_state) > + continue; I think this should be changed to - if (mux->idle_state == mux->cached_state) + if (mux->idle_state == mux->cached_state || + mux->idle_state == MUX_IDLE_AS_IS) continue; or the following mux_control_set will be called with state == MUX_IDLE_AS_IS. Alternatively, mux_control_set should return when passed this value. > + ret = mux_control_set(mux, mux->idle_state); > + if (ret < 0) { > + dev_err(&mux_chip->dev, "unable to set idle state\n"); > + return ret; > + } > + } > + > + ret = device_add(&mux_chip->dev); > + if (ret < 0) > + dev_err(&mux_chip->dev, > + "device_add failed in mux_chip_register: %d\n", ret); > + return ret; > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mux_chip_register); regards Philipp -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html