On 06/18/2012 09:08 AM, Roland Stigge wrote: > On 06/18/2012 04:50 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: >>> Can you please tell in which way the patch breaks those drivers? >>> However, I can see that those drivers solved the same problem in a >>> different way (deferring of_get_named_gpio(), via the sound init()). So >>> they could be adjusted to take advantage of new -EPROBE_DEFER. >> >> The drivers I mentioned test the return code of of_get_named_gpio() to >> see if it's -ENODEV, which means that DT property for that GPIO exists >> but the driver for it isn't available yet, so the property can't be >> parsed. In this case, the sound drivers defer their own probe. If >> of_get_named_gpio() is modified to return -EPROBE_DEFER directly, then >> it won't be returning -ENODEV, and hence the sound drivers' check for >> -ENODEV won't fire, and hence the sound drivers will just continue their >> probe assuming that the particular GPIOs are not present on the board >> (since they are all optional, so anything other than an explicit >> deferral error from of_get_named_gpio() is not treated as an error). >> This will break sound on those platforms. > > Thanks for the hint! I previously also suspected sth. like this but > didn't find it in v3.5-rc3. In broonie's sound.git for-next, I now > finally found it. > > Should be easy to fix (replacing the if (... == -ENODEV) to -EPROBE_DEFER. > > Will you provide patches as signalled, of should I? Which branch would > be the correct one to build on top? I'm happy either way. It'd probably be best to roll the change into your patch/series so you can manage all the dependencies in one series, but if you can't for some reason, I'm happy to provide a patch for this. -- 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
