Re: [PATCH 2/2] platform/chrome: cros_ec_proto: check for missing EC_CMD_HOST_EVENT_GET_WAKE_MASK

[Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@collabora.com>]

Hi Brian,

On 23/7/20 2:43, Brian Norris wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 2:13 PM Guenter Roeck <groeck@google.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 1:50 PM Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org> wrote:
>>> Other than perhaps taking a lesson not to propagate -ENOTSUPP, I don't
>>> think this series should block on that, as this is a bugfix IMO.
>>
>> My patch will return -EOPNOTSUPP for EC_RES_INVALID_COMMAND, so maybe
>> you could do the same. In my latest version (not yet submitted) I
>> extracted the conversion into a separate function, so if your patch is
>> accepted now I can just add another patch on top of it to start using
>> that function.
> 
> Sure, I can use EOPNOTSUPP in v2.
> 

Yes, please, can you send a v2 using EOPNOTSUPP

> BTW, the error code is completely internal to cros_ec_proto.c in my
> patch, so it seems even less-related to your series, unless I got
> refactor cros_ec_get_host_event_wake_mask() to use
> cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status() instead of send_command(). I'm actually not
> sure why we don't do that, now that I think about it...
> 
> So WDYT? Should I rebase on your eventual v3 and refactor to
> cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status()? Or (re)submit this first, and add one more
> cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status() usage for you to tweak in your series?
> 

No need to rebase on top of Guenter patches, as I plan to pick your patches first.

Regards,
Enric

> I don't mind a lot either way, except that I would like to port this
> to older kernels soon.
> 
> Brian
>