[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <791fdb7d-e0ec-eefb-c703-205c039eddc3@cogentembedded.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 13:12:23 +0300
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, 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
On 12/4/2017 9:25 PM, David Miller wrote:
>> @@ -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.
Well, we can have:
return r && r->start ? r->start : -ENXIO;
instead of:
return r ? r->start : -ENXIO;
at the end of platform_get_irq(). But I don't really think it's worth doing --
request_irq() doesn't filter out IRQ0 anyway, IIRC...
MBR, Sergei
Powered by blists - more mailing lists