[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220113224319.akljsjtu7ps75vun@pengutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2022 23:43:19 +0100
From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@....ru>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Amit Kucheria <amitk@...nel.org>,
ALSA Development Mailing List <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
MTD Maling List <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux I2C <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-spi <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
Khuong Dinh <khuong@...amperecomputing.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Matthias Schiffer <matthias.schiffer@...tq-group.com>,
Kamal Dasu <kdasu.kdev@...il.com>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
"open list:SERIAL DRIVERS" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
Linux PWM List <linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org>,
Robert Richter <rric@...nel.org>,
Saravanan Sekar <sravanhome@...il.com>,
Corey Minyard <minyard@....org>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
Peter Korsgaard <peter@...sgaard.com>,
William Breathitt Gray <vilhelm.gray@...il.com>,
Mark Gross <markgross@...nel.org>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Mun Yew Tham <mun.yew.tham@...el.com>,
Eric Auger <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
Linux MMC List <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@....com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Zha Qipeng <qipeng.zha@...el.com>,
Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund@...natech.se>,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] driver core: platform: Rename
platform_get_irq_optional() to platform_get_irq_silent()
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 11:57:43PM +0300, Sergey Shtylyov wrote:
> On 1/13/22 11:17 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> >> The subsystems regulator, clk and gpio have the concept of a dummy
> >> resource. For regulator, clk and gpio there is a semantic difference
> >> between the regular _get() function and the _get_optional() variant.
> >> (One might return the dummy resource, the other won't. Unfortunately
> >> which one implements which isn't the same for these three.) The
> >> difference between platform_get_irq() and platform_get_irq_optional() is
> >> only that the former might emit an error message and the later won't.
>
> This is only a current difference but I'm still going to return 0 ISO
> -ENXIO from latform_get_irq_optional(), no way I'd leave that -ENXIO there
> alone... :-)
This would address a bit of the critic in my commit log. But as 0 isn't
a dummy value like the dummy values that exist for clk, gpiod and
regulator I still think that the naming is a bad idea because it's not
in the spirit of the other *_get_optional functions.
Seeing you say that -ENXIO is a bad return value for
platform_get_irq_optional() and 0 should be used instead, I wonder why
not changing platform_get_irq() to return 0 instead of -ENXIO, too.
This question is for now only about a sensible semantic. That actually
changing platform_get_irq() is probably harder than changing
platform_get_irq_optional() is a different story.
If only platform_get_irq_optional() is changed and given that the
callers have to do something like:
if (this_irq_exists()):
... (e.g. request_irq)
else:
... (e.g. setup polling)
I really think it's a bad idea that this_irq_exists() has to be
different for platform_get_irq() vs. platform_get_irq_optional().
> > Reviewed-by: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
>
> Hm... I'm seeing a tag bit not seeing the patch itself...
See https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220113194358.xnnbhsoyetihterb@pengutronix.de/
This is just a tree-wide
s/platform_get_irq_optional/platform_get_irq_silent/ + a macro to not
break callers of platform_get_irq_optional().
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists