On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 01:02:52PM -0400, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Guenter,
>
> On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 10:57:53 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > Sibyte i2c bus driver returns non-descriptive error values.
> > Update to return error values as defined in Documentation/i2c/fault-codes.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-sibyte.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-sibyte.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-sibyte.c
> > index 3d76a18..329cbee 100644
> > --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-sibyte.c
> > +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-sibyte.c
> > @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ static int smbus_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *i2c_adap, u16 addr,
> > }
> > break;
> > default:
> > - return -1; /* XXXKW better error code? */
> > + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > }
> >
> > while (csr_in32(SMB_CSR(adap, R_SMB_STATUS)) & M_SMB_BUSY)
> > @@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ static int smbus_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *i2c_adap, u16 addr,
> > if (error & M_SMB_ERROR) {
> > /* Clear error bit by writing a 1 */
> > csr_out32(M_SMB_ERROR, SMB_CSR(adap, R_SMB_STATUS));
> > - return -1; /* XXXKW better error code? */
> > + return -ENXIO;
> > }
> >
> > if (data_bytes == 1)
>
> Definitely an improvement. However, returning -ENXIO on all errors
> seems wrong. This error value should only be returned on missing ack
> from the slave on address byte. Isn't it possible to distinguish
> between different error kinds? M_SMB_ERROR_TYPE seems promising, but
> one would need to look up the datasheet (which I don't have) to
> discover its meaning.
>
Makes sense. I'll dig up a copy of the datasheet and see if I can improve it.
Guenter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
