Messages in this thread | | | From | Stephen Hemminger <> | Subject | Re: request_irq() return value | Date | Thu, 27 Jul 2006 11:13:17 -0700 |
| |
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 19:50:03 +0200 Mariusz Kozlowski <m.kozlowski@tuxland.pl> wrote:
> Hello, > > I'm looking at the source code of different drivers and wondering about > request_irq() return value. It is used mostly in 'open' routine of struct > net_device. If request_irq() fails some drivers return -EAGAIN, some -EBUSY > and some the return value of request_irq(). Is this intentional? Sample > drivers code:
Correct practice is to propagate the error code of request_irq out to be the return value of the open routine. This allows the request_irq to return different values for overlapping irqs, or out of memory, etc.
> Besides request_irq() is arch dependent so depending on arch it has different > set of possible return values. So ... does the return value matter or I > misunderstood something here?
Each architecture should return something sane. If it doesn't then it a problem that should be addressed there. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |