@@ -846,7 +846,9 @@ static int machine_constraints_voltage(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
rdev->constraints->min_uV == rdev->constraints->max_uV) {
int current_uV = _regulator_get_voltage(rdev);
if (current_uV < 0) {
- rdev_err(rdev, "failed to get the current voltage\n");
+ rdev_err(rdev,
+ "failed to get the current voltage(%d)\n",
+ current_uV);
return current_uV;
}
if (current_uV < rdev->constraints->min_uV ||
@@ -856,8 +858,8 @@ static int machine_constraints_voltage(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
rdev->constraints->max_uV);
if (ret < 0) {
rdev_err(rdev,
- "failed to apply %duV constraint\n",
- rdev->constraints->min_uV);
+ "failed to apply %duV constraint(%d)\n",
+ rdev->constraints->min_uV, ret);
return ret;
}
}
With commit 064d5cd110f94ce41ca5681dcda8b77fa63d5b95 (regulator: core: Fix the init of DT defined fixed regulators) We ensure that regulator must be capable of providing it's current voltage when constraints are used, however adding the return value in the print is a little more informative to explain the nature of the failure involved. So, instead of providing message such as: smps9: failed to get the current voltage having error value added to the message such as: smps9: failed to get the current voltage(-22) is a little more informative for debugging the error. Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> --- drivers/regulator/core.c | 8 +++++--- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)