[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YxczWhMyDJgC5jmP@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2022 14:47:38 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Lars Povlsen <lars.povlsen@...rochip.com>,
Steen Hegelund <Steen.Hegelund@...rochip.com>,
UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] pinctr: microchip-sgpio: Correct the
fwnode_irq_get() return value check
On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 12:24:43AM +0200, Michael Walle wrote:
> Am 2022-09-05 21:08, schrieb Andy Shevchenko:
> > fwnode_irq_get() may return all possible signed values, such as Linux
> > error code. Fix the code to handle this properly.
> >
> > Fixes: be2dc859abd4 ("pinctrl: pinctrl-microchip-sgpio: Add irq
> > support (for sparx5)")
> > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
Thanks! I will send a v2 since I have to fix a typo in the Subject.
> Btw. do we care about EPROBE_DEFER?
In the original code this big (unsigned) value was added as parent IRQ and
things wouldn't work, with the proposed change IRQ won't work, but at least
in robust way without any surprises (whatever big parent IRQ number mean).
I think the people who have access to hardware and different configurations
of the kernel may or may not add the support later on.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists