Hi Vincent,
On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 15:07, Vincent Mailhol
<mailhol.vincent@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> For some reasons, I received your message twice (with a two minutes
> interval between both messages). These look identical. I am answering
My scripting didn't handle the comment in Rob's address correctly,
so I resent the patch with the fixed address.
> the most recent. :)
Good ;-)
> On 19/03/2025 at 22:27, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On the Renesas Gray Hawk Single development board:
> >
> > can-transceiver-phy can-phy0: /can-phy0: failed to get mux-state (0)
> >
> > "mux-states" is an optional property for CAN transceivers. However,
> > mux_get() always prints an error message in case of an error, including
> > when the property is not present, confusing the user.
>
> Hmmm, I understand why you are doing this patch. But on the long term,
> wouldn't it make more sense to have a devm_mux_state_get_optional()? Or
> maybe add a property somewhere to inform devm_mux_state_get() that this
> is optional?
>
> Regardless, just see this as an open question. I am OK with the approach
> of your patch.
Alternatively, we can be proactive and add a temporary local wrapper:
/* Dummy wrapper until optional muxes are supported */
static inline struct mux_state *
devm_mux_state_get_optional(struct device *dev, const char *mux_name)
{
if (!of_property_present(dev->of_node, "mux-states"))
return NULL;
return devm_mux_state_get(dev, mux_name);
}
and call that instead? Then the probe function needs no future changes
when the real devm_mux_state_get_optional() arrives.
> > Fix this by re-instating the property presence check.
> >
> > This is bascially a revert of commit d02dfd4ceb2e9f34 ("phy:
> > can-transceiver: Drop unnecessary "mux-states" property presence
> > check"), with two changes:
> > 1. Use the proper API for checking whether a property is present,
> > 2. Do not print an error message, as the mux core already takes care
> > of that.
> >
> > Fixes: d02dfd4ceb2e9f34 ("phy: can-transceiver: Drop unnecessary "mux-states" property presence check")> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Notwithstanding of above comment:
>
> Reviewed-by: Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks!
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
