Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] iio:imu: inv_mpu6050: support more interrupt types

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 04/17/2018 07:10 AM, Jean-Baptiste Maneyrol wrote:


On 15/04/2018 21:05, Martin Kelly wrote:
On 04/15/2018 10:43 AM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 09:42:14 -0700
Martin Kelly <mkelly@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 04/11/2018 12:01 AM, Jean-Baptiste Maneyrol wrote:
This is OK for me.

Jonathan will tell us about EBUSY error code for sure if it is not correct.

JB

Sounds good; once we hear from Jonathan, I will submit the next revision.
Optimists.  I can never make my mind up on some of the error codes.

It's not totally silly so I'm happy with EBUSY or ENODEV as you wish.

Jonathan


OK, then I will defer to Jean-Baptiste on this. Shall we go with ENODEV?

After looking into the irq kernel code, I think perhaps the best value should be EINVAL. What it really means, is that configuration is missing in the dts file where it shouldn't. Incorrect value seams more meaningful in this case.

Do you agree?

JB

Yes, EINVAL is fine with me. I didn't use it because there was a note in the aforementioned document saying that it's best to use a more specific error code. However, none of these error codes have a clear case for their use, and it's all a bit muddled, as Jonathan mentioned. I'll send a revision with EINVAL later this week when I'm back to my desk with hardware to test.
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Input]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [X.org]

  Powered by Linux