On 13/08/15 22:03, Dan Murphy wrote:
> Dan
>
> On 08/13/2015 03:21 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> The caller expect us to return zero if the ID doesn't match. Negative
>> error codes are treated as success.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/light/tsl4531.c b/drivers/iio/light/tsl4531.c
>> index 2697918..730fd2b 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iio/light/tsl4531.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iio/light/tsl4531.c
>> @@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ static int tsl4531_check_id(struct i2c_client *client)
>> {
>> int ret = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, TSL4531_ID);
>> if (ret < 0)
>> - return ret;
>> + return 0;
>>
>> switch (ret >> TSL4531_ID_SHIFT) {
>> case TSL45311_ID:
>
> Would this not be better to change the logic?
>
> Zero return is generally true and non-zero is false.
>
> Then this statement in the probe then can go from
>
> if (!tsl4531_check_id(client)) {
> dev_err(&client->dev, "no TSL4531 sensor\n");
> return -ENODEV;
> }
>
> to
>
> if (tsl4531_check_id(client)) {
> dev_err(&client->dev, "no TSL4531 sensor\n");
> return -ENODEV;
> }
>
> And if then return ret can be honored in probe.
>
> Dan
>
Oops, missed this email. I'd prefer to take it further and spit
out 0 for success as you suggest, but also do the error code
generation for no device in the check_id function, thus
allowing read failures to be passed up as well.
Jonathan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
