On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Sakari Ailus
<sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 02:59:45PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Thursday, October 5, 2017 8:04:24 AM CEST Sakari Ailus wrote:
>> > Fix more return codes for device property: Align return codes of
>> > __acpi_node_get_property_reference. In particular what was missed
>> > previously:
>> >
>> > -EPROTO could be returned in certain cases, now -EINVAL;
>> > -EINVAL was returned if the property was not found, now -ENOENT;
>> > -EINVAL was returned also if the index was higher than the number of
>> > entries in a package, now -ENOENT.
>> >
>> > Fixes: ("device property: Align return codes of __acpi_node_get_property_reference")
>> > Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > Tested-by: Hyungwoo Yang <hyungwoo.yang@xxxxxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> > Hi Rafael,
>> >
>> > Unfortunately the patch I posted the previous time to remedy the issue
>> > ("device property: Align return codes of
>> > _acpi_node_get_property_reference") did not fully fix the issue.
>>
>> OK, thanks for letting me know, but why didn't it?
>
> My testing appears to have been more limited than I thought, Hyungwoo later
> on found this out. (Reported-by: Hyungwoo... would be appropriate, I'll add
> that the next time.)
Well, you're not saying what exactly still doesn't work with the
previous patch applied which really is what I was asking about.
Thanks,
Rafael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
