
On 01/14/2015 04:14 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
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.
Definitely. They are bogus.
Thanks, Michal