[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YIT+da7/ZXr5Uj33@google.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2021 22:30:29 -0700
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: zhuguangqing83@...il.com, Bastien Nocera <hadess@...ess.net>,
Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@...math.org>,
linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Input: goodix - Fix missing IRQF_ONESHOT as only
threaded handler
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 10:47:11AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 at 05:18, <zhuguangqing83@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Guangqing Zhu <zhuguangqing83@...il.com>
> >
> > Coccinelle noticed:
> > drivers/input/touchscreen/goodix.c:497:8-33: ERROR: Threaded IRQ with no
> > primary handler requested without IRQF_ONESHOT
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Guangqing Zhu <zhuguangqing83@...il.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/input/touchscreen/goodix.c | 5 +++--
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
>
> Did you test it? There are several patches like this all over the tree
> so it looks like "let's fix everything from Coccinelle" because you
> ignored at least in some of the cases that the handler is not the
> default primary one. I am not saying that the change is bad, but
> rather it looks automated and needs more consideration.
At least the subject is bad because IRQF_ONESHOT is not missing, it is
simply set up elsewhere, the patch itself is a noop. I do not see a
reason to take this.
Thanks.
--
Dmitry
Powered by blists - more mailing lists