On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:42:27AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Vinod Koul <vinod.k...@intel.com> wrote: > > On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 04:25:57PM +0300, Peter Ujfalusi wrote: > >> dma_request_slave_channel_compat() 'eats' up the returned error codes which > >> prevents drivers using the compat call to be able to do deferred probing. > >> > >> The new wrapper is identical in functionality but it will return with error > >> code in case of failure and will pass the -EPROBE_DEFER to the caller in > >> case dma_request_slave_channel_reason() returned with it. > > This is okay but am worried about one more warpper, how about fixing > > dma_request_slave_channel_compat() > > Then all callers of dma_request_slave_channel_compat() have to be > modified to handle ERR_PTR first. > > The same is true for (the existing) dma_request_slave_channel_reason() > vs. dma_request_slave_channel(). Good point, looking again, I think we should rather fix dma_request_slave_channel_reason() as it was expected to return err code and add new users. Anyway users of this API do expect the reason...
-- ~Vinod -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html