If the pps-gpio driver was probed prior to the GPIO device it uses, the
devm_gpiod_get call returned an -EPROBE_DEFER error, but pps_gpio_probe
replaced that error code with -EINVAL, causing the pps-gpio probe to
fail and not be retried later. Propagate the error return value so that
deferred probe works properly.
Fixes: 161520451dfa (pps: new client driver using GPIO)
Signed-off-by: Robert Hancock <[email protected]>
---
drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c b/drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c
index 35799e6401c9..2f4b11b4dfcd 100644
--- a/drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c
+++ b/drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c
@@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ static int pps_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
/* GPIO setup */
ret = pps_gpio_setup(dev);
if (ret)
- return -EINVAL;
+ return ret;
/* IRQ setup */
ret = gpiod_to_irq(data->gpio_pin);
--
2.31.1
On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 02:52:14PM -0600, Robert Hancock wrote:
> If the pps-gpio driver was probed prior to the GPIO device it uses, the
> devm_gpiod_get call returned an -EPROBE_DEFER error, but pps_gpio_probe
> replaced that error code with -EINVAL, causing the pps-gpio probe to
> fail and not be retried later. Propagate the error return value so that
> deferred probe works properly.
FWIW,
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
> Fixes: 161520451dfa (pps: new client driver using GPIO)
> Signed-off-by: Robert Hancock <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c b/drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c
> index 35799e6401c9..2f4b11b4dfcd 100644
> --- a/drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c
> +++ b/drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c
> @@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ static int pps_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> /* GPIO setup */
> ret = pps_gpio_setup(dev);
> if (ret)
> - return -EINVAL;
> + return ret;
>
> /* IRQ setup */
> ret = gpiod_to_irq(data->gpio_pin);
> --
> 2.31.1
>
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
On 12/01/22 22:07, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 02:52:14PM -0600, Robert Hancock wrote:
>> If the pps-gpio driver was probed prior to the GPIO device it uses, the
>> devm_gpiod_get call returned an -EPROBE_DEFER error, but pps_gpio_probe
>> replaced that error code with -EINVAL, causing the pps-gpio probe to
>> fail and not be retried later. Propagate the error return value so that
>> deferred probe works properly.
>
> FWIW,
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
>
>> Fixes: 161520451dfa (pps: new client driver using GPIO)
>> Signed-off-by: Robert Hancock <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c b/drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c
>> index 35799e6401c9..2f4b11b4dfcd 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c
>> @@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ static int pps_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> /* GPIO setup */
>> ret = pps_gpio_setup(dev);
>> if (ret)
>> - return -EINVAL;
>> + return ret;
>>
>> /* IRQ setup */
>> ret = gpiod_to_irq(data->gpio_pin);
>> --
>> 2.31.1
>>
>
--
GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: [email protected]
Linux Device Driver [email protected]
Embedded Systems phone: +39 349 2432127
UNIX programming skype: rodolfo.giometti
On Thu, 2022-01-13 at 09:17 +0100, Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
> On 12/01/22 22:07, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 02:52:14PM -0600, Robert Hancock wrote:
> > > If the pps-gpio driver was probed prior to the GPIO device it uses, the
> > > devm_gpiod_get call returned an -EPROBE_DEFER error, but pps_gpio_probe
> > > replaced that error code with -EINVAL, causing the pps-gpio probe to
> > > fail and not be retried later. Propagate the error return value so that
> > > deferred probe works properly.
> >
> > FWIW,
> > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
>
> Acked-by: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
It's not entirely clear to me what tree PPS patches are supposed to go through.
Seems like some recent ones have gone through char-misc? Not sure if someone
has this in their queue?
> > > Fixes: 161520451dfa (pps: new client driver using GPIO)
> > > Signed-off-by: Robert Hancock <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c | 2 +-
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c b/drivers/pps/clients/pps-
> > > gpio.c
> > > index 35799e6401c9..2f4b11b4dfcd 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/pps/clients/pps-gpio.c
> > > @@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ static int pps_gpio_probe(struct platform_device
> > > *pdev)
> > > /* GPIO setup */
> > > ret = pps_gpio_setup(dev);
> > > if (ret)
> > > - return -EINVAL;
> > > + return ret;
> > >
> > > /* IRQ setup */
> > > ret = gpiod_to_irq(data->gpio_pin);
> > > --
> > > 2.31.1
> > >
>
>
--
Robert Hancock
Senior Hardware Designer, Calian Advanced Technologies
http://www.calian.com
On 29/01/22 23:02, Robert Hancock wrote:
> On Thu, 2022-01-13 at 09:17 +0100, Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
>> On 12/01/22 22:07, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 02:52:14PM -0600, Robert Hancock wrote:
>>>> If the pps-gpio driver was probed prior to the GPIO device it uses, the
>>>> devm_gpiod_get call returned an -EPROBE_DEFER error, but pps_gpio_probe
>>>> replaced that error code with -EINVAL, causing the pps-gpio probe to
>>>> fail and not be retried later. Propagate the error return value so that
>>>> deferred probe works properly.
>>>
>>> FWIW,
>>> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
>>
>> Acked-by: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
>
> It's not entirely clear to me what tree PPS patches are supposed to go through.
> Seems like some recent ones have gone through char-misc? Not sure if someone
> has this in their queue?
LinuxPPS has no its own tree. All related patches usually are sent to me to be
acked and to Greg Kroah-Hartman for inclusion.
Ciao,
Rodolfo
--
GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: [email protected]
Linux Device Driver [email protected]
Embedded Systems phone: +39 349 2432127
UNIX programming skype: rodolfo.giometti
On Sun, 2022-01-30 at 10:35 +0100, Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
> On 29/01/22 23:02, Robert Hancock wrote:
> > On Thu, 2022-01-13 at 09:17 +0100, Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
> > > On 12/01/22 22:07, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 02:52:14PM -0600, Robert Hancock wrote:
> > > > > If the pps-gpio driver was probed prior to the GPIO device it uses,
> > > > > the
> > > > > devm_gpiod_get call returned an -EPROBE_DEFER error, but
> > > > > pps_gpio_probe
> > > > > replaced that error code with -EINVAL, causing the pps-gpio probe to
> > > > > fail and not be retried later. Propagate the error return value so
> > > > > that
> > > > > deferred probe works properly.
> > > >
> > > > FWIW,
> > > > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > Acked-by: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
> >
> > It's not entirely clear to me what tree PPS patches are supposed to go
> > through.
> > Seems like some recent ones have gone through char-misc? Not sure if
> > someone
> > has this in their queue?
>
> LinuxPPS has no its own tree. All related patches usually are sent to me to
> be
> acked and to Greg Kroah-Hartman for inclusion.
>
> Ciao,
>
> Rodolfo
>
It looks like some MAINTAINERS links should maybe be updated for PPS - the
referenced page at http://wiki.enneenne.com/index.php/LinuxPPS_support seems to
be dead. There is http://linuxpps.org/doku.php which points to a new mailing
list location as well, but that seems to have very little activity.
Greg, can you pick this patch ( https://lkml.org/lkml/2022/1/12/879 ) up?
--
Robert Hancock
Senior Hardware Designer, Calian Advanced Technologies
http://www.calian.com
On 02/02/22 18:04, Robert Hancock wrote:
> On Sun, 2022-01-30 at 10:35 +0100, Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
>> On 29/01/22 23:02, Robert Hancock wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2022-01-13 at 09:17 +0100, Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
>>>> On 12/01/22 22:07, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 02:52:14PM -0600, Robert Hancock wrote:
>>>>>> If the pps-gpio driver was probed prior to the GPIO device it uses,
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> devm_gpiod_get call returned an -EPROBE_DEFER error, but
>>>>>> pps_gpio_probe
>>>>>> replaced that error code with -EINVAL, causing the pps-gpio probe to
>>>>>> fail and not be retried later. Propagate the error return value so
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> deferred probe works properly.
>>>>>
>>>>> FWIW,
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
>>>>
>>>> Acked-by: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> It's not entirely clear to me what tree PPS patches are supposed to go
>>> through.
>>> Seems like some recent ones have gone through char-misc? Not sure if
>>> someone
>>> has this in their queue?
>>
>> LinuxPPS has no its own tree. All related patches usually are sent to me to
>> be
>> acked and to Greg Kroah-Hartman for inclusion.
>>
>> Ciao,
>>
>> Rodolfo
>>
>
> It looks like some MAINTAINERS links should maybe be updated for PPS - the
> referenced page at http://wiki.enneenne.com/index.php/LinuxPPS_support seems to
> be dead. There is http://linuxpps.org/doku.php which points to a new mailing
> list location as well,
Yeah. Attached is a patch to fix these.
> but that seems to have very little activity.
That's one of reasons why LunuxPPS doesn't have its own tree. :)
Ciao,
Rodolfo
--
GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: [email protected]
Linux Device Driver [email protected]
Embedded Systems phone: +39 349 2432127
UNIX programming skype: rodolfo.giometti
On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 05:04:13PM +0000, Robert Hancock wrote:
> On Sun, 2022-01-30 at 10:35 +0100, Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
> > On 29/01/22 23:02, Robert Hancock wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2022-01-13 at 09:17 +0100, Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
> > > > On 12/01/22 22:07, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 02:52:14PM -0600, Robert Hancock wrote:
> > > > > > If the pps-gpio driver was probed prior to the GPIO device it uses,
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > devm_gpiod_get call returned an -EPROBE_DEFER error, but
> > > > > > pps_gpio_probe
> > > > > > replaced that error code with -EINVAL, causing the pps-gpio probe to
> > > > > > fail and not be retried later. Propagate the error return value so
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > deferred probe works properly.
> > > > >
> > > > > FWIW,
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
> > > >
> > > > Acked-by: Rodolfo Giometti <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > It's not entirely clear to me what tree PPS patches are supposed to go
> > > through.
> > > Seems like some recent ones have gone through char-misc? Not sure if
> > > someone
> > > has this in their queue?
> >
> > LinuxPPS has no its own tree. All related patches usually are sent to me to
> > be
> > acked and to Greg Kroah-Hartman for inclusion.
> >
> > Ciao,
> >
> > Rodolfo
> >
>
> It looks like some MAINTAINERS links should maybe be updated for PPS - the
> referenced page at http://wiki.enneenne.com/index.php/LinuxPPS_support seems to
> be dead. There is http://linuxpps.org/doku.php which points to a new mailing
> list location as well, but that seems to have very little activity.
>
> Greg, can you pick this patch ( https://lkml.org/lkml/2022/1/12/879 ) up?
Please use lore.kernel.org, lkml.org does not work with our tools, nor
do we have any control over it.
thanks,
greg k-h