On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > So I'd say it makes sense to propagate errors returned by the driver's > get() hook. This might contradict some of our earlier statements about > simplifying the GPIO API, but is preferrable to having to make a > decision as to which valid value to return if the driver fails... > > It should then be made very clear in the documentation that the only > positive values ever returned by the GPIO API will be 0 and 1 (we > already have a clamping mechanism for that IIRC), and that negative > values are propagated as-is. > > Linus, does that seem reasonable to you? Does anyone has the intention > to address that one or should I add it to my short-term TODO list? I'm aligned with this. Go ahead on this path. Yours, Linus Walleij -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
