On 14 January 2015 at 01:04, Michal Simek michal.simek@xilinx.com wrote:
Ensure that operations are correctly setup.
Signed-off-by: Michal Simek michal.simek@xilinx.com
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org
(comment below)
drivers/fpga/xilinx.c | 17 +++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/fpga/xilinx.c b/drivers/fpga/xilinx.c index adb4b8cd25fd..9c95148b25c1 100644 --- a/drivers/fpga/xilinx.c +++ b/drivers/fpga/xilinx.c @@ -139,6 +139,11 @@ int xilinx_load(xilinx_desc *desc, const void *buf, size_t bsize, return FPGA_FAIL; }
if (!desc->operations || !desc->operations->load) {printf("%s: Missing load operation\n", __func__);return FPGA_FAIL;
I wonder if these error codes should be dropped in favour of the standard ones? Perhaps in a separate patch. E.g. here we could use -ENOSYS.
}return desc->operations->load(desc, buf, bsize, bstype);}
@@ -151,8 +156,10 @@ int xilinx_loadfs(xilinx_desc *desc, const void *buf, size_t bsize, return FPGA_FAIL; }
if (!desc->operations->loadfs)
if (!desc->operations || !desc->operations->loadfs) {printf("%s: Missing loadfs operation\n", __func__); return FPGA_FAIL;} return desc->operations->loadfs(desc, buf, bsize, fpga_fsinfo);} @@ -165,6 +172,11 @@ int xilinx_dump(xilinx_desc *desc, const void *buf, size_t bsize) return FPGA_FAIL; }
if (!desc->operations || !desc->operations->dump) {printf("%s: Missing dump operation\n", __func__);return FPGA_FAIL;}return desc->operations->dump(desc, buf, bsize);}
@@ -228,7 +240,8 @@ int xilinx_info(xilinx_desc *desc)
if (desc->iface_fns) { printf ("Device Function Table @ 0x%p\n", desc->iface_fns);
desc->operations->info(desc);
if (desc->operations && desc->operations->info)desc->operations->info(desc); } else printf ("No Device Function Table.\n");-- 1.8.2.3
Regards, Simon