Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 31 Oct 2022 11:26:44 +0800
From:   Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Cc:     Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@towertech.it>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
        Benson Leung <bleung@chromium.org>, linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org,
        chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: cros-ec: Limit RTC alarm range if needed
Message-ID: <Y19AdIntJZGnBh/y@google.com>
References: <20221029005400.2712577-1-linux@roeck-us.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20221029005400.2712577-1-linux@roeck-us.net>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 05:54:00PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> Drop error messages in cros_ec_rtc_get() and cros_ec_rtc_set() since the
> calling code also logs an error and to avoid spurious error messages if
> setting the alarm ultimately succeeds.

It only retries for cros_ec_rtc_set().  cros_ec_rtc_get() doesn't emit
spurious error messages.

cros_ec_rtc_get() could preserve the error log; cros_ec_rtc_set() could change
from using dev_err() to dev_warn() since cros_ec_rtc_set_alarm() calls
dev_err() if cros_ec_rtc_set() fails.  But this is quite nitpick so anyway.

> Cc: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>

Reviewed-by: Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org>