On Tue, 25 Jan 2022, Martinez, Ricardo wrote:
> On 1/24/2022 6:51 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> > On Thu, 13 Jan 2022, Ricardo Martinez wrote:
> > > +int t7xx_fsm_append_cmd(struct t7xx_fsm_ctl *ctl, enum t7xx_fsm_cmd_state
> > > cmd_id, unsigned int flag)
> > No callsite in this patch seems to care about the error code, is it ok?
>
> Even though there's no recovery path (like retry) for t7xx_fsm_append_cmd()
> failures, it makes sense to
>
> propagate the error instead of ignoring it, will add that in the next version.
>
> > E.g.:
> > > +int t7xx_md_init(struct t7xx_pci_dev *t7xx_dev)
> > > +{
> > > ...
> > If this returns an error, does it mean init/probe stalls? Or is there
> > some backup to restart?
> An error here will cause probe to fail, there's no recovery path for this.
Just to clarify, I think you misunderstood what I meant as you cut the
critical line out in the reply. ...I meant heare that if
t7xx_fsm_append_cmd returns an error, it will not make the probe to fail
but lead to probe stalling (which propagating the error you intend to do
will nicely address).
--
i.
