[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190801122559.GC1659@ninjato>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 14:25:59 +0200
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
To: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>,
Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
cocci@...teme.lip6.fr, Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v5 0/3] Add error message to platform_get_irq*()
> these drivers pop up, I think we can have another function like
> platform_get_irq_probe() or platform_get_irq_nowarn() that doesn't print
> an error message. Then we can convert the drivers that are poking around
> for interrupts to use this new function instead. It isn't the same as a
> platform_get_optional_irq() API because it returns an error when the irq
> isn't there or we fail to parse something, but at least the error
> message is gone.
True.
I still feel uneasy about pushing false positive error messages to
users. Do you think your cocci-script could be updated to modify drivers
which do not bail out when platform_get_irq() fails to use
platform_get_irq_nowarn()? I'd think this would catch most of them?
Or maybe the other way around? platform_get_irq_warn() and only convert
those which print something?
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists