[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180302162821.bmsxgrqqaginjooo@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2018 16:28:21 +0000
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
Ben Dooks <ben-linux@...ff.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: s3c2410: Properly handle interrupts of number 0
On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 03:32:22PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> How do we break this status quo and finally solve the IRQ 0 and
> NO_IRQ issue?
> Another possibility would be to change platform_get_irq() and
> suffer the regressions that will cause, telling people that fixing
> their platform IRQ numbering is the only solution (but this
> requires breaking our ideals about regressions.)
How about we start with a warning? That'll be visible, but shouldn't
result in broken systems while we wait for people to fix things up.
e.g. something like the below.
Mark.
---->8----
diff --git a/drivers/base/platform.c b/drivers/base/platform.c
index f1bf7b38d91c..bd42eeffd2aa 100644
--- a/drivers/base/platform.c
+++ b/drivers/base/platform.c
@@ -126,7 +126,12 @@ int platform_get_irq(struct platform_device *dev, unsigned int num)
irqd_set_trigger_type(irqd, r->flags & IORESOURCE_BITS);
}
- return r ? r->start : -ENXIO;
+ if (!r)
+ return -ENXIO;
+
+ WARN_ONCE(!r->start, "Platform uses zero as a valid IRQ.");
+
+ return r->start;
#endif
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(platform_get_irq);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists