[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20171204.132556.1601454745789376393.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2017 13:25:56 -0500 (EST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: arvind.yadav.cs@...il.com
Cc: wg@...ndegger.com, mkl@...gutronix.de, michal.simek@...inx.com,
opendmb@...il.com, f.fainelli@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7 v2] net: ethernet: i825xx: Fix platform_get_irq's
error checking
From: Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@...il.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2017 23:18:20 +0530
> @@ -120,9 +120,10 @@ static int sni_82596_probe(struct platform_device *dev)
> netdevice->dev_addr[5] = readb(eth_addr + 0x06);
> iounmap(eth_addr);
>
> - if (!netdevice->irq) {
> + if (netdevice->irq <= 0) {
> printk(KERN_ERR "%s: IRQ not found for i82596 at 0x%lx\n",
> __FILE__, netdevice->base_addr);
> + retval = netdevice->irq ? netdevice->irq : -ENODEV;
> goto probe_failed;
> }
Ok, thinking about this some more...
It is impossible to use platform_get_irq() without every single call
site having this funny:
ret = val ? val : -ENODEV;
sequence.
This is unnecessary duplication and it is also error prone, so I
really think this logic belongs in platform_get_irq() itself. It can
convert '0' to -ENODEV and that way we need no special logic in the
callers at all.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists