linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] i2c / ACPI: Assign IRQ for devices that have GpioInt automatically

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 29 Apr 2015 13:02:49 +0300
From:	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
	Octavian Purdila <octavian.purdila@...el.com>,
	Robert Dolca <robert.dolca@...el.com>,
	linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] i2c / ACPI: Assign IRQ for devices that have GpioInt
 automatically

On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 11:56:06AM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> 
> > -	if (!client->irq && dev->of_node) {
> > -		int irq = of_irq_get(dev->of_node, 0);
> > +	if (client->irq <= 0) {
> > +		int irq = -ENOENT;
> 
> Why the move from !client->irq to <= 0? If I didn't miss something,
> interrupt numbers are still a sleeping dog with all the unsigned vs
> signed fuzz. If this change is needed, this needs proper description and
> ideally a seperate patch.

It is there because ACPI parts of I2C client enumeration code
initializes client->irq with -1. Alternatively we can change that code
to use 0 for missing IRQ.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/