linux-kernel - Re: request_irq() usage in wm8350_register

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: <c4e71b60-0aac-44bc-bdf1-13ec1df3e8da@opensource.cirrus.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2026 12:49:11 +0000
From: Richard Fitzgerald <rf@...nsource.cirrus.com>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: patches@...nsource.cirrus.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: request_irq() usage in wm8350_register_irq().

On 21/01/2026 11:57 am, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2026-01-21 11:53:28 [+0000], Richard Fitzgerald wrote:
>> Ah. I didn't notice that. Confusing error message. It says
>> "handler=NULL" but handler != NULL. More like "handler=default".
> 
> The supplied argument was NULL.
> Anyway. Do you happen to have an answer to my original question.
> 
> Sebastian

Afraid I'm not familiar with the WM8350.

But I note that call is not registering against a real interrupt pin.
It's registering against a virtual irqchip that is itself a threaded
IRQ handler. Maybe that makes a difference. That top-level virtual IRQ
handler is ONESHOT.