Messages in this thread | | | From | Andy Shevchenko <> | Date | Sun, 26 Dec 2021 10:48:44 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] irqchip/renesas-irqc: Use platform_get_irq_optional() to get the interrupt |
| |
On Sun, Dec 26, 2021 at 1:59 AM Lad, Prabhakar <prabhakar.csengg@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Dec 25, 2021 at 5:40 PM Andy Shevchenko > <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 25, 2021 at 7:28 PM Lad, Prabhakar > > <prabhakar.csengg@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sat, Dec 25, 2021 at 4:46 PM Andy Shevchenko > > > <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 9:52 AM Lad Prabhakar > > > > <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com> wrote: > > > > > > ret = platform_get_irq_optional(...); > > > > if (ret < 0 && ret != -ENXIO) > > > > return ret; > > > > if (ret > 0) > > > > ...we got it... > > > > > > > > It will allow the future API fix of platform_get_irq_optional() to be > > > > really optional. > > > > > > > Later patch [0] (merged into -next) does check for -ENXIO first. > > > > > > [0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20211216182121.5323-1-prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com/t/ > > > > The problem is that it doesn't consider 0 as no IRQ. > > > Can you please point me to the discussion/patch where this API change > is considered/discussed. Just to clarify now the new API for > platform_get_irq_optional() will return "0" in case there is no > interrupt and not not -ENXIO anymore?
The longest one happened here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ide/20211209145937.77719-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com/T/#u
It has links to some other discussions on the topic.
> When will this patch be merged for the new api, so that I can base my > patches on top of it to avoid more changes?
You can simply imply that, I dunno when it gets merged (from my point of view the users should be fixed first, and since you are adding users, the burden is increasing).
-- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
| |