linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ata: Don't use NO_IRQ in pata_of

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]

Message-ID: <20111202191917.GB3037@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Fri, 2 Dec 2011 19:19:17 +0000
From:	Dave Martin <dave.martin@...aro.org>
To:	Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@...il.com>
Cc:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ata: Don't use NO_IRQ in pata_of_platform driver

On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 08:28:59PM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> Drivers should not use NO_IRQ; moreover, some architectures don't
> have it nowadays. '0' is the 'no irq' case.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@...il.com>
> Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
> 
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 03:38:16PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 19:26:06 +0400
> > Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@...il.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Drivers should not use NO_IRQ; moreover, some architectures don't
> > > have it nowadays. '0' is the 'no irq' case.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@...il.com>
> > 
> > Acked-by: Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> In case if we don't want a "band-aid fix" for 3.2, here is the patch
> that just does the proper fix (w/ a risk to break minor architectures).

This is now broken on ARM where, for good or bad, NO_IRQ currently is
used and is -1.

How do we resolve it?  If we are ready to eliminate NO_IRQ from
drivers/of/irq.c (or indeed, all code that uses it) and just use 0 for
that case, we should surely just do it... but I'm not confident I can
judge on that.

Half-removing NO_IRQ is going to be problematic, though...
I really don't care whether the "no irq" value is 0 or -1, but it is
abundantly clear that choosing different values to mean the same thing
on opposite sides of an interface does not work.

Cheers
---Dave

> 
>  drivers/ata/pata_of_platform.c |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_of_platform.c b/drivers/ata/pata_of_platform.c
> index a72ab0d..2a472c5 100644
> --- a/drivers/ata/pata_of_platform.c
> +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_of_platform.c
> @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ static int __devinit pata_of_platform_probe(struct platform_device *ofdev)
>  	}
>  
>  	ret = of_irq_to_resource(dn, 0, &irq_res);
> -	if (ret == NO_IRQ)
> +	if (!ret)
>  		irq_res.start = irq_res.end = 0;
>  	else
>  		irq_res.flags = 0;
> -- 
> 1.7.5.3
> 
> _______________________________________________
> devicetree-discuss mailing list
> devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org
> https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
--
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/