On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 11:57:15AM +0530, Shubhrajyoti Datta wrote: > On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > [...] > >> > >> However if only a few go through should we return the number of > >> successful transactions > >> instead of error? > >> > > Most other I2C bus drivers do the same, so I decided to not make the code > > more complicated than necessary and do it the same way. Also, I prefer to have > > the actual error code returned to the caller, not "I transferred x of your y > > messages, but I won't tell you what went wrong with the rest". > > depends on what the user decides however if ever his algo is that resend only > the remaining it would never work. Anyways thats a different story. > Worse, many callers don't check if the return code matches the number of messages. So errors can get lost if the return code after an error is not negative. Guenter > > > > If that prevents it from getting integrated, I'll be happy to change it. > > I have no objections to the patch getting integrated. > Afterall anything that helps, helps:-) > > > > > > Thanks, > > 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
