śr., 11 mar 2020 o 20:03 Doug Berger [off-list ref] napisał(a):

The label names are viewed as a convenience for the user and are not
necessary for the proper functionality of the driver and device, so we
don't want to prevent the driver from succeeding at probe due to an
error in the gpio-line-names property. The bank->gc.names member is
still made non-NULL which is what we really care about to prevent the
misapplication of label names by devprop_gpiochip_set_names().

In fact, it is expected that the device-tree will only include label
strings up to the last GPIO of interest so the ENODATA error is
considered a valid result to terminate any further labeling so there is
no need for an error message in that case.

Other error results are unexpected so an error message indicating the
consequence of the error is appropriate here.

I'm not sure which aspect is confusing to you, so it's not clear to me
how best to comment the code. I can hazard a guess, but if you have a
suggestion I'm happy to submit a v3.

Thanks for taking the time to review this,
    Doug

No it's fine, thank you for the explanation.

Bartosz

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel