Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20201202133754.32045-1-info@metux.net>
In-Reply-To: <20201202133754.32045-1-info@metux.net>
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Date:   Sat, 5 Dec 2020 23:29:22 +0100
Message-ID: <CACRpkdbG3ZSBCk_8QaP+7g5O-Otjrxv2VU3fXnsSuDDuQRMYyA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] gpio: just plain warning when nonexisting gpio requested
To:     "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <info@metux.net>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 2:37 PM Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
<info@metux.net> wrote:

> From: Enrico Weigelt <info@metux.net>
>
> When trying to export an nonexisting gpio ID, the kernel prints out a
> big warning w/ stacktrace, sounding like a huge problem. In fact it's
> a pretty normal situation, like file or device not found.
>
> So, just print a more relaxed warning instead.
>
> changes v2: drop defining pr_fmt()
>
> Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt <info@metux.net>

Hm hm. It would mainly happen if someone was using the sysfs
ABI right? I don't mind if sysfs feels scary to use.

But I see it can happen for other code using the old GPIO
symbols so OK I applied it.

Yours,
Linus Walleij