[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091216191839.GA23614@pengutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 20:18:39 +0100
From: Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@...mvista.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Vrabel <david.vrabel@....com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
David Brownell <dbrownell@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
spi-devel-general@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] spi/mpc8xxx: don't check platform_get_irq's return
value against zero
Hi Anton,
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 09:20:34PM +0300, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 06:49:04PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> [...]
> > > Noooooo... :-(
> > >
> > > Please revert 305b3228f9ff4d59f49e6d34a7034d44ee8ce2f0 instead,
> > > and fix platforms to remap HWIRQ0 to something that is not VIRQ0.
> > >
> > > IRQ0 is invalid for everything that is outside of arch/*.
> > >
> > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/11/22/159
> > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/11/22/213
> > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/11/22/227
> > First note that my check is safe with both variants (e.g. it does the
> > right thing independent of the error being signaled by 0 or
> > -ESOMETHING.)
> >
> > Then arch/arm/mach-pxa/devices.c has:
> >
> > static struct resource pxa27x_resource_ssp3[] = {
> > ...
> > [1] = {
> > .start = IRQ_SSP3,
> > .end = IRQ_SSP3,
> > .flags = IORESOURCE_IRQ,
> > },
> > ...
> > }
> >
> > with IRQ_SSP3 being zero (sometimes). The driver is implemented in
> > arch/arm/mach-pxa/ssp.c and uses platform_get_irq.
>
> So fix this *one* driver? Implement arm-specific platform_get_irq() as
> a band-aid. Or better, implement virtual irqs <-> hardware irqs mapping
> for ARM.
>
> [...]
> > I'm a bit annoyed as this is the third time[1] this month this irq0
> > discussion pops up for me. I think people see that irq0 is involved
> > somehow, start wailing and stop seeing the issues being fixed.
>
> For this particular driver, there is NO issue whatsoever. It is
> only used for PowerPC, which has VIRQ0 == invalid IRQ. And note
> that there still could be HWIRQ0 on PowerPC, but it is *never*
> mapped to VIRQ0.
Yes, there is an issue. If the platform device doesn't have a resource
specifing the irq, platform_get_irq returns -ENXIO. So in the driver
(unsigned)(-ENXIO) is passed to mpc8xxx_spi_probe as (!(-ENXIO)) is
false and so the error isn't catched.
> [...]
> > [1] one is:
> > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/924739
>
> No wonder the discussion popped up. You're adding some ugly
> #ifdef stuff that adds some arch-specific knowledge to a generic
> code.
I wouldn't argue if people objected to the arch-specific #ifdef. The
arch-specific code is already in there and I don't object to just
removing it. But answering that irq0 must not be used isn't helpful.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists