Re: [PATCH v5 5/9] block: implement NVMEM provider

On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 11:33:22 +0200, Loic Poulain
[off-list ref] said:

On Mon, Jun 15, 2026 at 11:28 AM Loic Poulain
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Also we cannot safely return -EPROBE_DEFER from add_disk_final()
either. The NVMEM registration point is late in the sequence, too much
has already happened to easily unwind. The easiest is that the NVMEM
simply won't be available if registration fails, which looks
acceptable?

I'd argue that it's a problem with subsystem code then as unwinding should
work fine no matter the point in the sequence when it's initiated but I guess
this isn't really an issue in your patches.

I suppose we shouldn't typically run into probe deferral here so I'm fine just
ignoring the return value.

Bart