Hi, On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 11:41 AM Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > If we get an error (other than -ENOENT) we need to propagate that up the > stack. Otherwise if the nvmem driver hasn't probed yet, we'll end up with > whatever OPP(s) are represented by bit zero. Can you explain the "whatever OPP(s) are represented by bit zero" part? This doesn't seem to be true because `supp_hw` is initiated to UINT_MAX. If I'm remembering how this all works, doesn't that mean that if we get an error we'll assume all OPPs are OK? I'm not saying that I'm against your change, but I think maybe you're misdescribing the old behavior. Speaking of the initialization of supp_hw, if we want to change the behavior like your patch does then we should be able to remove that initialization, right? I would also suspect that your patch will result in a compiler warning, at least on some compilers. The goto label `done` is no longer needed, right? -Doug
