From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754019AbbCBSY2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Mar 2015 13:24:28 -0500 Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:32865 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753757AbbCBSYZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Mar 2015 13:24:25 -0500 Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 18:24:18 +0000 From: Mark Brown To: Takashi Iwai Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20150302182418.GD21293@sirena.org.uk> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="dwzPYjoHIc2P3x/3" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Cookie: My LESLIE GORE record is BROKEN ... User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 94.175.94.161 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: regcache_sync() errors for read-only registers cache X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mezzanine.sirena.org.uk) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --dwzPYjoHIc2P3x/3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 01:59:30PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote: > A quick fix is the patch like below, but obviously it doesn't cover > the all cases but only addresses the signle rw. Please don't bury patches in the middle of mails, that just means that if the patch is useful it's painful to apply. Your patch seems fine but can you please resend in a directly applyable format unless something in the below indicates against that... > Also, _regmap_write() itself calls again regmap_writeable(), so it's > superfluous. Alternatively, we may check -EIO from _regmap_write() > and treat as a special case not to show the error. Or, add a > parameter to skip regmap_writeable() call. I'm sorry but I can't parse the above - what is "it" in this context? Silently ignoring -EIO from the physical register write sounds like a very bad idea though, that seems likely to discard actual errors. --dwzPYjoHIc2P3x/3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJU9KrRAAoJECTWi3JdVIfQC0UH/RjiCN0wnQdDh1WfdpHHxNYM 8Olmb00FW98uiM02u+DbBhJPPCsT2RXM7VhPSYlNBmT3xNhJGHcCaTcIg0YQe+g4 ub70g6xHD/pb+OVRO0oZDcOMLb67yTBW8rYa/M3kF+O0HczUSgAPWCCyXMm88IUz a05vpGbjW0XbGJSEHGGV6163CpxANBx0bMA80yeRTt6KmK1FUwUBn2WS6n+EaDzw 1fm0+lA2NLBfZIgaXASXwlfsME7lLzvxBw9G3JFh3utUOF+RPpJ6ApFozIaI5dlJ 7SSQ3pIN2I759kCu5VE8dyUK0PYPBWmkmFUN66T8JlA0qyJQOiNstDBUJ33aaQQ= =f1N5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --dwzPYjoHIc2P3x/3--