Hi, On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 08:26:33PM +0000, Oleksandr Ocheretnyi -X (oocheret - GLOBALLOGIC INC at Cisco) wrote: > Hi Mika, > > > However I remember you caught situation where > micron_st_nor_read_fsr() > > returns -EOPNOTSUPP > > (intel_spi_exec_mem_op callback returns -EOPNOTSUPP), according to > your > > patch > > > [3]https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mtd/20220506105158.43613-1-mika.wester > > berg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ I've noted in description body. So I think I > have > > to cover both errorcodes, haven't I? > I was thinking that you change the both functions in Intel SPI to > return > > -ENOTSUPP, not just one. > > you know 'drivers/mtd/spi-nor' sources use -EOPNOTSUPP errorcode only, > however > > 'drivers/spi' modules (where intel driver is located as well as > spi-mem.c) use both errorcodes many times > > (-EOPNOTSUPP and -ENOTSUPP). Oh, indeed. I remembered that SPI-NOR core was using ENOTSUP but it was SPI-MEM instead. > So maybe it is better to use -EOPNOTSUPP for intel driver file (what > uses -EOPNOTSUPP everywhere) and > > update the spi-mem.c with -EOPNOTSUPP as return value, how do you > think? Yes, I think this is the correct approach. You need to be careful though to make sure the callers of SPI-MEM functions do not get unexpected values.