On 30/06/17 20:40, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 3:54 AM, Chris Packham
> <chris.packham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Rather than returning -ENODEV if i2c_pca_add_numbered_bus() fails,
>> propagate the error to aid debugging.
>>
>
> + Suggested-by ?
>
> You or Wolfram can use below if you agree on it (I'm fine either way):
>
> Suggested-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx>
>
I'll include it (and the Reviewed-by) in v2 if there is one.
>> Signed-off-by: Chris Packham <chris.packham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>> ---
>> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-pca-platform.c | 6 +++---
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-pca-platform.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-pca-platform.c
>> index daccef6865e8..853a2abedb05 100644
>> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-pca-platform.c
>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-pca-platform.c
>> @@ -232,9 +232,9 @@ static int i2c_pca_pf_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> return ret;
>> }
>>
>> - if (i2c_pca_add_numbered_bus(&i2c->adap) < 0) {
>> - return -ENODEV;
>> - }
>> + ret = i2c_pca_add_numbered_bus(&i2c->adap);
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>>
>> platform_set_drvdata(pdev, i2c);
>>
>> --
>> 2.13.0
>>
>
>
>
