summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorGuenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>2020-08-22 08:08:54 -0700
committerEnric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@collabora.com>2020-08-24 11:37:34 +0200
commitd509f8a71aa0a5e6d92409d9f0b4eaa94615727d (patch)
tree176d4849684f1a6e9973c011378636330a77dc85
parentb646e7db1ce85e24bdb3afd16e542a348a53d2ab (diff)
downloadlinux-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.c29
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;