Re: [v3,1/4] mfd: cros_ec: Add cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status helper
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Date: 2016-06-17 21:42:40
Also in:
linux-pwm, lkml
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 12:58:12PM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Tomeu Vizoso <redacted> So that callers of cros_ec_cmd_xfer don't have to repeat boilerplate code when checking for errors from the EC side. Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <redacted> Reviewed-by: Benson Leung <bleung@chromium.org> Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org> Acked-by: Lee Jones <redacted> Tested-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra <redacted> --- v3: * successfully spell success v2: * no change --- drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 33 insertions(+)diff --git a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c index b6e161f71b26..ecc544c728f0 100644 --- a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c +++ b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c@@ -380,3 +380,18 @@ int cros_ec_cmd_xfer(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev, return ret; } EXPORT_SYMBOL(cros_ec_cmd_xfer); + +int cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev, + struct cros_ec_command *msg) +{ + int ret; + + ret = cros_ec_cmd_xfer(ec_dev, msg); + if (ret < 0) + dev_err(ec_dev->dev, "Command xfer error (err:%d)\n", ret); + else if (msg->result != EC_RES_SUCCESS) + return -EECRESULT - msg->result;
I have been wondering about the error return codes here, and if they should be converted to standard Linux error codes. For example, I just hit error -1003 with a driver I am working on. This translates to EC_RES_INVALID_PARAM, or, in Linux terms, -EINVAL. I think it would be better to use standard error codes, especially since some of the errors are logged. Guenter