[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VfFyOChqNEtdot0_Pzb+E2EFjGPuJPjvpL-UW0_FsB1Kg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2025 19:13:47 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, Andre Werner <andre.werner@...tec-electronic.com>,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, hvilleneuve@...onoff.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
lech.perczak@...lingroup.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] serial: sc16is7xx: Extend IRQ check for negative valus
On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 12:02 PM Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org> wrote:
> On 16. 01. 25, 10:53, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 10:42:14AM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> >> This is threaded weirdly.
> >
> > Yeah, new patch (version) — new email thread.
> >
> >> On 16. 01. 25, 10:32, Andre Werner wrote:
> >>> Fix the IRQ check to treat the negative values as No IRQ.
> >>
> >> Care to describe on what HW that can happen?
> >
> > But how does this relevant? The whole idea is that neither I²C nor SPI
> > frameworks do not guarantee the IRQ field never be negative. This is
> > the fix to the previously submitted patch.
>
> They do AFAICS. Could you be more specific?
Hmm... I have looked into the SPI core and this behaviour seems quite
new. Documentation still says the same as before where it's not
guaranteed.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists