lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Dec]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] thermal: rcar_thermal: Use platform_get_irq_optional() to get the interrupt
From
Date
On 20/12/2021 14:48, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 1:29 PM Daniel Lezcano
> <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> wrote:
>> On 18/12/2021 15:41, Lad Prabhakar wrote:
>>> platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_IRQ, ..) relies on static
>>> allocation of IRQ resources in DT core code, this causes an issue
>>> when using hierarchical interrupt domains using "interrupts" property
>>> in the node as this bypasses the hierarchical setup and messes up the
>>> irq chaining.
>>>
>>> In preparation for removal of static setup of IRQ resource from DT core
>>> code use platform_get_irq_optional().
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>
>>> ---
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Dropping usage of platform_get_resource() was agreed based on
>>> the discussion [0].
>>>
>>> [0] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-renesas-soc/
>>> patch/20211209001056.29774-1-prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com/
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Prabhakar
>>> ---
>>> drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c | 15 +++++++++++----
>>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c b/drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c
>>> index b49f04daaf47..e4c7bc1bf7ef 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c
>>> @@ -445,7 +445,7 @@ static int rcar_thermal_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> struct rcar_thermal_common *common;
>>> struct rcar_thermal_priv *priv;
>>> struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
>>> - struct resource *res, *irq;
>>> + struct resource *res;
>>> const struct rcar_thermal_chip *chip = of_device_get_match_data(dev);
>>> int mres = 0;
>>> int i;
>>> @@ -467,9 +467,16 @@ static int rcar_thermal_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> pm_runtime_get_sync(dev);
>>>
>>> for (i = 0; i < chip->nirqs; i++) {
>>> - irq = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_IRQ, i);
>>> - if (!irq)
>>> + int irq;
>>> +
>>> + irq = platform_get_irq_optional(pdev, i);
>>> + if (irq <= 0 && irq != -ENXIO) {
>>> + ret = irq ? irq : -ENXIO;
>>> + goto error_unregister;
>>> + }
>>> + if (irq == -ENXIO)
>>> continue;
>>
>> Why not invert the conditions?
>>
>> if (irq == -ENXIO)
>> continue;
>
> And this can be break.
>
>>
>> if (irq <= 0) {
>> ret = irq ? irq : -ENXIO;
>
> irq == 0 cannot happen.
>
>> goto out_unregister;
>> }

Sorry, I don't get the two comments. May be I missed something but it
seems for me the results are the same with the inverted conditions or not.

if (irq <= 0 && irq != -ENXIO)
goto out;

if (irq == -ENXIO)
continue;

Can be changed to:

if (irq != -ENXIO)
if (irq <= 0)
goto out;

if (irq == -ENXIO)
continue;

Can be changed to:


if (irq == -ENXIO)
continue;

if (irq != -ENXIO)
if (irq <= 0)
goto out;

The second condition is always true because the first condition is the
opposite of the second condition, if the second condition block is
reached, that means irq != -ENXIO, so we can remove the second condition
and that results into:

if (irq == -ENXIO)
continue;

if (irq <= 0)
goto out;


Did I miss your point ?



> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
>
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
> -- Linus Torvalds
>


--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-12-20 15:20    [W:0.069 / U:0.104 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site