On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 04:35:27PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 23:17 +0900, Mark Brown wrote: > > ...which suggests that anything detecting an error should report it via > > status, no? > Unclear. I dived into spi.c to understand if I could override or not. > There are two fields status and state, the latter is dedicated for an > actual driver usage, and that is clear. Many (old) drivers are using > state as a storage for custom status. Newer drivers, that are using SPI > core, mostly don't care about error handling at all (at least I didn't > find an existing example of the message->status usage). This isn't something specific to modern drivers, the status field has been there since forever and is still widely used. Almost all error detection for SPI controllers (especially that's likely to trigger and therefore have a practical effect) is timeouts and that's been factored out into the core for the more modern drivers. > > > > I'd also expect this to go with the other kerneldoc for the field. > > > Any place that suits better. > > Well, see above... > Regarding my above comment can we extend the description of the field > then? Let's see what a patch looks like. I am wary of documentation that's too verbose since it can cause people to glaze over when reading it.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
