[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210814234103.GA828447@roeck-us.net>
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2021 16:41:03 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic: Convert to handle_strict_flow_irq()
On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 11:31:45PM +0100, Valentin Schneider wrote:
> On 14/08/21 23:26, Valentin Schneider wrote:
> >
> > Now, the above makes me feel like this is the start of a wild goose chase
> > for irqchips in a similar situation.
>
> The ones in arch/arm are easy enough to catch (I see gpc, omap-wakeupgen
> and some exynos suspend thing), less so for the ones in drivers/irqchip...
Try:
make coccicheck COCCI=irq_chip.cocci MODE=report M=.
with the script below. I am sure the script could be augmented if
there is some secondary condition that makes irq_ack mandatory.
Guenter
---
irq_chip.cocci:
virtual report
@c@
identifier chip;
position p;
@@
struct irq_chip chip@p = {
...
};
@i@
identifier c.chip;
identifier f;
@@
struct irq_chip chip = {
.irq_ack = f,
};
@script:python depends on c && !i && report@
p << c.p;
@@
print "Found %s:%s" % (p[0].file, p[0].line)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists