[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <875ymd6xdu.wl-maz@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 19:44:13 +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>,
Pascal Paillet <p.paillet@...s.st.com>,
Ludovic Barre <ludovic.barre@...s.st.com>,
Loic Pallardy <loic.pallardy@...s.st.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] irqchip/stm32-exti: forward irq_request_resources to parent
On Tue, 10 May 2022 17:41:20 +0100,
Antonio Borneo <antonio.borneo@...s.st.com> wrote:
>
> From: Pascal Paillet <p.paillet@...s.st.com>
>
> Enhance stm32-exti driver to forward request_resources and
> release_resources_parent operations to parent.
> Do not use irq_request_resources_parent because it returns
> an error when the parent does not implement irq_request_resources.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pascal Paillet <p.paillet@...s.st.com>
> Signed-off-by: Antonio Borneo <antonio.borneo@...s.st.com>
> ---
> drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c
> index c8003f4f0457..3f6d524a87fe 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c
> @@ -550,6 +550,16 @@ static void stm32_exti_h_unmask(struct irq_data *d)
> irq_chip_unmask_parent(d);
> }
>
> +static int stm32_exti_h_request_resources(struct irq_data *data)
> +{
> + data = data->parent_data;
> +
> + if (data->chip->irq_request_resources)
> + return data->chip->irq_request_resources(data);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
Why do you need to reinvent the whole thing? Why isn't it just:
static int stm32_exti_h_request_resources(struct irq_data *data)
{
irq_chip_request_resources_parent(data);
return 0;
}
And this really deserves a comment. I also wonder whether we should
change this behaviour to always return 0.
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists