On 11/16/2011 06:12 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 06:09:06PM +0100, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: >> On 11/16/2011 05:56 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > >>> No, really - just do something legible and robust. For example, teach >>> regmap_readable() about the cache. > >> Doesn't make much sense. We call regmap_readable from regcache_read, which >> is only called if we use a cache. So if we let regmap_readable return true >> in case we use a cache it will always be true in regcache_read and we can >> drop the check entirely. > > We should at least check that we actually have a cached value there - > the cache is sparse after all. That's what the cache already does today, you recently change the rbtree implementation to return -ENOENT if there is no cached value. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
