Re: [PATCH] driver: base: pinctrl: return error from pinctrl_bind_pins()

[Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Deepak <deepak_das@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> strict pin controller returns -EINVAL in case of pin request which
> is already claimed by somebody else.
> Following is the sequence of calling pin_request() from
> pinctrl_bind_pins():-
> pinctrl_bind_pins()->pinctrl_select_state()->pinmux_enable_setting()->
> pin_request()
>
> But pinctrl_bind_pins() only returns -EPROBE_DEFER which makes device
> driver probe successful even if the pin request is rejected by the pin
> controller subsystem.
>
> This commit modifies pinctrl_bind_pins() to return error if the pin is
> rejected by pin control subsystem.
>
> Signed-off-by: Deepak Das <deepak_das@xxxxxxxxxx>

Aha

>      /* Only return deferrals */
> -    if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> +    if ((ret != -EPROBE_DEFER) && (ret != -EINVAL))
>          ret = 0;

I rewrote this when applying, like this:

-       /* Only return deferrals */
-       if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
-               ret = 0;
+       /* Return deferrals */
+       if (ret == -EPROBE_DEFER)
+               return ret;
+       if (ret == -EINVAL) {
+               dev_err(dev, "could not initialize pin control state\n");
+               return ret;
+       }
+       /* We ignore errors like -ENOENT meaning no pinctrl state */

-       return ret;
+       return 0;

Can you confim that this works for you too?

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html