On 20/11/2024 15:07, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: >> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c b/drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c >> index 5d91b8e22844608f35432f1ba9c08d477d4ff762..93212c8f20ad65ecc44804b00f4b93e3eaaf8d95 100644 >> --- a/drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c >> +++ b/drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c >> @@ -1075,6 +1075,9 @@ int qcom_scm_assign_mem(phys_addr_t mem_addr, size_t mem_sz, >> int ret, i, b; >> u64 srcvm_bits = *srcvm; >> >> + if (!qcom_scm_is_available()) >> + return -EPROBE_DEFER; >> + > > Should we be returning -EPROBE_DEFER from functions that are not > necessarily limited to being used in probe()? For instance ath10k uses > it in a workqueue job. I think this is why this driver is probed in > subsys_initcall() rather than module_initcall(). Uh, good point. To my understanding, every resource like function can do it, e.g. clk_get. Whether drivers call it in probe() or somewhere else - e.g. some startup call like there is plenty in the ASoC or DMA device_alloc_chan_resources() - is responsibility of the driver/consumer, not the provider of that resource. With such explanation returning EPROBE_DEFER is ok, just like returning anything else (e.g. EINVAL). Now about this function: it is not exactly "get a resource" one, but still the caller might want to call it again later, which is implied by EPROBE_DEFER. Maybe this should be EAGAIN instead? Just like power-supply is doing in power_supply_get_property(). Best regards, Krzysztof
