Hi Kieran, On Friday, 9 February 2018 12:01:09 EET Kieran Bingham wrote: > Hi Wolfram, > > As part of my work looking at using i2c_new_secondary_device() to move > address mappings into the device tree, it has become evident that the > return code of the i2c_new_secondary_device() is obfuscated, and is simply > a valid client - or NULL. > > This means that we must 'guess' as to whether the device failed due to a > memory allocation, or if the device address was already in use (perhaps a > more common failure). > > Because of this - I would like to see the return codes of > i2c_new_secondary_device(), ic2_new_dummy(), and therefore i2c_new_device() > support returning ERR_PTR()s rather than a client or NULL. > > These functions are used fairly extensively - thus it will be a fair bit of > work (or a good coccinelle script) - So I'd like to ask your opinion on the > validity of this task before I commence anything down that rabbit hole! > > Any comments? Pre-ack/nack? (from anyone?) Pre-ack from me :-) -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart
