[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75Vd=fU9O19DGjBGOcf3im_MVz4rAasTB87KgAfkRA-uMgA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 21:35:12 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Daniel Campello <campello@...omium.org>
Cc: LKML <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
linux-iio <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/15] iio: sx9310: Fix irq handling
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 7:49 PM Daniel Campello <campello@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> Fixes enable/disable irq handling at various points. The driver needs to
> only enable/disable irqs if there is an actual irq handler installed.
...
> static int sx9310_enable_irq(struct sx9310_data *data, unsigned int irq)
> {
> - return regmap_update_bits(data->regmap, SX9310_REG_IRQ_MSK, irq, irq);
> + if (data->client->irq)
> + return regmap_update_bits(data->regmap, SX9310_REG_IRQ_MSK, irq,
> + irq);
> + return 0;
Wouldn't it be better to insert rather
if (!irq)
return 0;
than disrupting the entire function?
> }
>
> static int sx9310_disable_irq(struct sx9310_data *data, unsigned int irq)
> {
> - return regmap_update_bits(data->regmap, SX9310_REG_IRQ_MSK, irq, 0);
> + if (data->client->irq)
> + return regmap_update_bits(data->regmap, SX9310_REG_IRQ_MSK, irq,
> + 0);
> + return 0;
Ditto.
> }
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists