lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Mar]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/5] pci: handled return value of platform_get_irq correctly
On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 10:05:58PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org> writes:
> > On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 10:53:06AM +0100, Marc Gonzalez wrote:
> >> Last time around, my understanding was that, going forward,
> >> the best solution was:
> >>
> >> virq = platform_get_irq(...)
> >> if (virq <= 0)
> >> return virq ? : -ENODEV;
> >>
> >> i.e. map 0 to -ENODEV, pass other errors as-is, remove the dev_err
> >>
> >> @Bjorn/Lorenzo did you have a change of heart?
> >
> > Yes. In 10006651 (Oct 20, 2017), I thought:
> >
> > irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
> > if (irq <= 0)
> > return -ENODEV;
> >
> > was fine. In 11066455 (Aug 7, 2019), I said I thought I was wrong and
> > that:
> >
> > platform_get_irq() is a generic interface and we have to be able to
> > interpret return values consistently. The overwhelming consensus
> > among platform_get_irq() callers is to treat "irq < 0" as an error,
> > and I think we should follow suit.
> > ...
> > I think the best pattern is:
> >
> > irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, i);
> > if (irq < 0)
> > return irq;
>
> Careful. 0 is not a valid interrupt.

Should callers of platform_get_irq() check for a 0 return value?
About 900 of them do not.

Or should platform_get_irq() return a negative error instead of 0?
If 0 is not a valid interrupt, I think it would be easier to use the
interface if we made it so platform_get_irq() could never return 0,
which I think would also fit the interface documentation better:

* Return: IRQ number on success, negative error number on failure.

Bjorn

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-03-13 22:57    [W:0.053 / U:1.292 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site