On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 4:06 AM, Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 07 Oct 2011 10:33:09 +0500 > "G, Manjunath Kondaiah" <manjugk@xxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> The gpio library should return -EPROBE_DEFER in gpio_request >> if gpio driver is not ready. > > Why not use the perfectly good existing error codes we have for this ? > > We have EAGAIN and EUNATCH both of which look sensible. I want a distinct error code for probe deferral so that a) it doesn't overlap with something a driver is already doing, and b) so that all the users can be found again at a later date. That said, I'm not in agreement with this patch. It is fine for gpio lib to have a code that means the pin doesn't exist (yet), but the device driver needs to be the one to decide whether or not it is appropriate to use probe deferral. g. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
