On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 11:09:30PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Vignesh R <vigne...@ti.com> [150719 21:53]: > > @@ -445,6 +443,8 @@ static struct pixcir_ts_platform_data > > *pixcir_parse_dt(struct device *dev) > > dev_dbg(dev, "%s: x %d, y %d, gpio %d\n", __func__, > > pdata->x_max + 1, pdata->y_max + 1, pdata->gpio_attb); > > > > + pdata->wakeirq = of_irq_get_byname(dev->of_node, "wakeupirq"); > > + > > return pdata; > > What about handling -EPROVE_DEFER here? At least pinctrl-single can be > be a loadable module for the dedicated wakeirqs.
Right. I think we should only allow -ENODATA to continue and return error in all other cases. Also, I think "irq" suffix on name is redundant. Thanks. -- Dmitry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
