On Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 07:49:36PM +0200, Krzysztof Adamski wrote:
> Dnia Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 08:46:22AM -0700, Guenter Roeck napisał(a):
> > > +void tmp421_probe_child_from_dt(struct i2c_client *client,
> > > + struct device_node *child,
> > > + struct tmp421_data *data)
> > > +
> > > +{
> > > + struct device *dev = &client->dev;
> > > + u32 i;
> > > + int err;
> > > +
> > > + err = of_property_read_u32(child, "reg", &i);
> > > + if (err) {
> > > + dev_err(dev, "missing reg property of %pOFn\n", child);
> > > + return;
> >
> > Report to caller
> >
>
> My idea was to make those errors in DT non-critical. I.e. if one of the
> child nodes is not well structured, I just skip it but continue the
> probing. Do you think it should be considered critical and I should
> abort the whole probe function as soon as I detect such DT errors,
> instead?
>
Yes, I do think so. Otherwise people will just generate bad DT files and
never fix them or even on purpose ignore the error messages. I don't want
to see such messages in a production system.
On a side note, I do not accept dev_err/pr_err if the error is ignored.
Either it is an error, or it isn't.
Thanks,
Guenter
