diff options
author | Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> | 2020-08-22 08:08:54 -0700 |
---|---|---|
committer | Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@collabora.com> | 2020-08-24 11:37:34 +0200 |
commit | d509f8a71aa0a5e6d92409d9f0b4eaa94615727d (patch) | |
tree | 176d4849684f1a6e9973c011378636330a77dc85 | |
parent | b646e7db1ce85e24bdb3afd16e542a348a53d2ab (diff) | |
download | linux-d509f8a71aa0a5e6d92409d9f0b4eaa94615727d.tar.gz linux-d509f8a71aa0a5e6d92409d9f0b4eaa94615727d.tar.bz2 linux-d509f8a71aa0a5e6d92409d9f0b4eaa94615727d.zip |
pwm: cros-ec: Accept more error codes from cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status
Since commit c5cd2b47b203 ("platform/chrome: cros_ec_proto: Report command
not supported") we can no longer assume that cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status()
reports -EPROTO for all errors returned by the EC itself. A follow-up
patch will change cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status() to report additional errors
reported by the EC as distinguished Linux error codes.
Handle this change by no longer assuming that only -EPROTO is used
to report all errors returned by the EC itself. Instead, support both
the old and the new error codes.
Add a comment describing cros_ec_num_pwms() to explain its functionality.
Cc: Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@chromium.org>
Cc: Yu-Hsuan Hsu <yuhsuan@chromium.org>
Cc: Prashant Malani <pmalani@chromium.org>
Cc: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
Acked-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Signed-off-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@collabora.com>
-rw-r--r-- | drivers/pwm/pwm-cros-ec.c | 29 |
1 files changed, 22 insertions, 7 deletions
diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-cros-ec.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-cros-ec.c index 09c08dee099e..94d3dff9b0e5 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-cros-ec.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-cros-ec.c @@ -204,6 +204,11 @@ static const struct pwm_ops cros_ec_pwm_ops = { .owner = THIS_MODULE, }; +/* + * Determine the number of supported PWMs. The EC does not return the number + * of PWMs it supports directly, so we have to read the pwm duty cycle for + * subsequent channels until we get an error. + */ static int cros_ec_num_pwms(struct cros_ec_device *ec) { int i, ret; @@ -213,20 +218,30 @@ static int cros_ec_num_pwms(struct cros_ec_device *ec) u32 result = 0; ret = __cros_ec_pwm_get_duty(ec, i, &result); - /* We want to parse EC protocol errors */ - if (ret < 0 && !(ret == -EPROTO && result)) - return ret; - /* * We look for SUCCESS, INVALID_COMMAND, or INVALID_PARAM * responses; everything else is treated as an error. + * The EC error codes either map to -EOPNOTSUPP / -EINVAL, + * or -EPROTO is returned and the EC error is in the result + * field. Check for both. */ - if (result == EC_RES_INVALID_COMMAND) + switch (ret) { + case -EOPNOTSUPP: /* invalid command */ return -ENODEV; - else if (result == EC_RES_INVALID_PARAM) + case -EINVAL: /* invalid parameter */ return i; - else if (result) + case -EPROTO: + /* Old or new error return code: Handle both */ + if (result == EC_RES_INVALID_COMMAND) + return -ENODEV; + else if (result == EC_RES_INVALID_PARAM) + return i; return -EPROTO; + default: + if (ret < 0) + return ret; + break; + } } return U8_MAX; |