linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/7] irqchip/stm32-exti: set_affinity return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <878rr96xuo.wl-maz@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 10 May 2022 19:34:07 +0100
From:   Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To:     Antonio Borneo <antonio.borneo@...s.st.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Ludovic Barre <ludovic.barre@...s.st.com>,
        Loic Pallardy <loic.pallardy@...s.st.com>,
        Pascal Paillet <p.paillet@...s.st.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] irqchip/stm32-exti: set_affinity return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE if no parent

Antonio,

On Tue, 10 May 2022 17:41:17 +0100,
Antonio Borneo <antonio.borneo@...s.st.com> wrote:
> 
> From: Ludovic Barre <ludovic.barre@...s.st.com>
> 
> If no parent, there is no specific action to do in
> stm32 irqchip, and so return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre <ludovic.barre@...s.st.com>
> Signed-off-by: Antonio Borneo <antonio.borneo@...s.st.com>
> ---
>  drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c
> index 9d18f47040eb..10c9c742c216 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c
> @@ -614,7 +614,7 @@ static int stm32_exti_h_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d,
>  	if (d->parent_data->chip)
>  		return irq_chip_set_affinity_parent(d, dest, force);
>  
> -	return -EINVAL;
> +	return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE;
>  }
>  
>  static int __maybe_unused stm32_exti_h_suspend(void)

<rant>
Can you *please* use a cover-letter when sending more that a single
patch? I expect there is an overarching motive to this series. Where
is it described?

Also, please look at the way the subject lines are written for most
irqchip patches:

irqchip/foo: Frobify the bar callback return value

Note the capital letter after the ':', and the fact that it starts
with a verb. Here, I would have liked to see:

irqchip/stm32-exti: Fix set_affinity() return value

and leave the meat of the description to the commit log (instead of
saying the exact same thing twice).
</rant>

Thanks,

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.