[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <567FC914.4080705@cogentembedded.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2015 14:18:44 +0300
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Cc: Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr>,
Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.com>, cocci@...teme.lip6.fr,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] coccinelle: api: check for propagation of error from
platform_get_irq
On 12/27/2015 9:13 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:
>> Well, looking again, the patch should be good. I just thought its goal was
>> to fix the code as well...
>
> I could do that for the irq < 0 case, but I think that in that case, kbuild
> will only run the patch version, and the <= cases will not be reported on.
> I don't have a general fix for the <= 0. Is it even correct to have < in
> some cases and <= in others?
That's a good question...
In my prior fixes of this case I preferred to consider IRQ0 valid and so
used 'irq < 0'. I myself don't share the "IRQ0 is invalid" sentiment...
> julia
MBR, Sergei
--
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