linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v2 3/3] i2c: smbus: Use device_*() functions instead of of

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 20 Jan 2022 09:48:24 +0000
From:   Akhil R <akhilrajeev@...dia.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
CC:     Christian Koenig <christian.koenig@....com>,
        Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
        linux-i2c <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-tegra <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 3/3] i2c: smbus: Use device_*() functions instead of
 of_*()

> On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 4:15 PM Akhil R <akhilrajeev@...dia.com> wrote:
> >
> > Change of_*() functions to device_*() for firmware agnostic usage.
> > This allows to have smbus_alert interrupt without any changes
> 
> the smbus_alert
> 
> > in the controller drivers using ACPI table.
> 
> the ACPI
> 
> ...
> 
> This change reveals potential issue:
> 
> > -               irq = of_irq_get_byname(adapter->dev.of_node, "smbus_alert");
> > +               irq = device_irq_get_byname(adapter->dev.parent, "smbus_alert");
> 
> >                 if (irq <= 0)
> 
> I guess this '= 0' part should be fixed first.

'0' is a failure as per the documentation of of_irq_get_byname() as well as
of_irq_get(). The case is different for acpi_irq_get(), but it is handled in
fwnode_irq_get(). If I understood it right, a return value of '0' should be 
considered a failure here.

Thanks,
Akhil