Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1424156 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-06-16 17:00 +0200 |
| Last post | 2016-06-20 11:10 +0200 |
| Articles | 3 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] mfd: rn5t618: register power off callback optionally Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> - 2016-06-16 17:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] mfd: rn5t618: register power off callback optionally Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch> - 2016-06-19 03:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] mfd: rn5t618: register power off callback optionally Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> - 2016-06-20 11:10 +0200
| From | Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 17:00 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] mfd: rn5t618: register power off callback optionally |
| Message-ID | <rKGVY-1bI-35@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Tue, 07 Jun 2016, Stefan Agner wrote:
> Only register power off if the PMIC is defined as system power
> controller (see Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/
> power-controller.txt).
>
> Reviewed-by: Marcel Ziswiler <marcel.ziswiler@toradex.com>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch>
These should be chronological.
> ---
> drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c | 10 +++++++---
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> index 7607ced..d9b4d40 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> @@ -103,9 +103,13 @@ static int rn5t618_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c,
> return ret;
> }
>
> - if (!pm_power_off) {
> - rn5t618_pm_power_off = priv;
> - pm_power_off = rn5t618_power_off;
> + if (of_device_is_system_power_controller(i2c->dev.of_node)) {
> + if (!pm_power_off) {
> + rn5t618_pm_power_off = priv;
> + pm_power_off = rn5t618_power_off;
> + } else {
> + dev_err(&i2c->dev, "Failed to set poweroff capability, already defined\n");
This is not an error. Please use dev_warn() instead.
Also, is this message actually accurate? Your commit message would
indicate that it's not.
> + }
> }
>
> return 0;
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-19 03:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rLzz4-3qF-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1424156 |
On 2016-06-16 07:59, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Jun 2016, Stefan Agner wrote:
>
>> Only register power off if the PMIC is defined as system power
>> controller (see Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/
>> power-controller.txt).
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Marcel Ziswiler <marcel.ziswiler@toradex.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch>
>
> These should be chronological.
>
Has been discussed already here:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-May/345835.html
It's an artifact of my development process, I keep the commits in my
local branches without signed off lines and add them before sending out
patches. So whenever I prepare a new revision, collected acks, sobs are
chronological, but end up before my sob.
But since you are the second maintainer which has objection to that
style I probably should change that...
>> ---
>> drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c | 10 +++++++---
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
>> index 7607ced..d9b4d40 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
>> @@ -103,9 +103,13 @@ static int rn5t618_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c,
>> return ret;
>> }
>>
>> - if (!pm_power_off) {
>> - rn5t618_pm_power_off = priv;
>> - pm_power_off = rn5t618_power_off;
>> + if (of_device_is_system_power_controller(i2c->dev.of_node)) {
>> + if (!pm_power_off) {
>> + rn5t618_pm_power_off = priv;
>> + pm_power_off = rn5t618_power_off;
>> + } else {
>> + dev_err(&i2c->dev, "Failed to set poweroff capability, already defined\n");
>
> This is not an error. Please use dev_warn() instead.
>
Hm, I agree... FWIW, I copied the code (and that message) from here,
where dev_err is probably also not appropriate:
drivers/regulator/act8865-regulator.c
> Also, is this message actually accurate? Your commit message would
> indicate that it's not.
Hm, maybe we should bail out with an error in that case since DT
explicitly asks to be power controller... Is that what you mean?
--
Stefan
>
>> + }
>> }
>>
>> return 0;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-20 11:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rM3ns-6ij-29@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1425906 |
On Sat, 18 Jun 2016, Stefan Agner wrote:
> On 2016-06-16 07:59, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Tue, 07 Jun 2016, Stefan Agner wrote:
> >
> >> Only register power off if the PMIC is defined as system power
> >> controller (see Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/
> >> power-controller.txt).
> >>
> >> Reviewed-by: Marcel Ziswiler <marcel.ziswiler@toradex.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch>
> >
> > These should be chronological.
> >
>
> Has been discussed already here:
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-May/345835.html
>
> It's an artifact of my development process, I keep the commits in my
> local branches without signed off lines and add them before sending out
> patches. So whenever I prepare a new revision, collected acks, sobs are
> chronological, but end up before my sob.
>
> But since you are the second maintainer which has objection to that
> style I probably should change that...
It would make your life easier in the long run. :)
> >> ---
> >> drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c | 10 +++++++---
> >> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> >> index 7607ced..d9b4d40 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> >> @@ -103,9 +103,13 @@ static int rn5t618_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c,
> >> return ret;
> >> }
> >>
> >> - if (!pm_power_off) {
> >> - rn5t618_pm_power_off = priv;
> >> - pm_power_off = rn5t618_power_off;
> >> + if (of_device_is_system_power_controller(i2c->dev.of_node)) {
> >> + if (!pm_power_off) {
> >> + rn5t618_pm_power_off = priv;
> >> + pm_power_off = rn5t618_power_off;
> >> + } else {
> >> + dev_err(&i2c->dev, "Failed to set poweroff capability, already defined\n");
> >
> > This is not an error. Please use dev_warn() instead.
> >
>
> Hm, I agree... FWIW, I copied the code (and that message) from here,
> where dev_err is probably also not appropriate:
> drivers/regulator/act8865-regulator.c
Mark (Regulator maintainer) also accepts patches.
> > Also, is this message actually accurate? Your commit message would
> > indicate that it's not.
>
> Hm, maybe we should bail out with an error in that case since DT
> explicitly asks to be power controller... Is that what you mean?
I think I misunderstood the message. To fix this I would reword it.
"Poweroff call-back already defined"
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web