lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jun]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v1 01/11] mfd: intel_soc_pmic_bxtwc: Don't shadow error codes in show()/store()
On Tue, 28 Jun 2022, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 10:47:10AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Jun 2022, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 10:05:07AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 16 Jun 2022, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > > > > + ret = kstrtoul(buf, 0, &bxtwc_reg_addr);
> > > > > + if (ret) {
> > > > > dev_err(dev, "Invalid register address\n");
> > > >
> > > > Is that really what failure means, on every failure?
> > > >
> > > > "Returns 0 on success, -ERANGE on overflow and -EINVAL on parsing
> > > > error."
> > >
> > > As far as I can see in either case the address is invalid.
> > > Basically we may drop this confusing error message here, if
> > > this what you prefer.
> >
> > Your call. I just wanted you to consider it for a moment.
>
> Userspace will print an error based on the error code, so
> I would rather remove _this_ message since it doesn't add
> value, esp. when we could have -ERANGE.

Works for me.

--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Principal Technical Lead - Developer Services
Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-06-29 16:36    [W:0.052 / U:0.120 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site