From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95013C433EF for ; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 19:27:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S242842AbhLJTam (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:30:42 -0500 Received: from mga06.intel.com ([134.134.136.31]:39184 "EHLO mga06.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234441AbhLJTak (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:30:40 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10194"; a="299212247" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,196,1635231600"; d="scan'208";a="299212247" Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Dec 2021 11:27:05 -0800 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,196,1635231600"; d="scan'208";a="462649633" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.184]) by orsmga003-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Dec 2021 11:26:49 -0800 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1mvlWd-004coT-DK; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 21:25:47 +0200 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 21:25:47 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Sergey Shtylyov Cc: Sergei Shtylyov , Damien Le Moal , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Hans de Goede , Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] ata: libahci_platform: Get rid of dup message when IRQ can't be retrieved Message-ID: References: <20211209145937.77719-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> <9e6b2e9a-e958-0c14-6570-135607041978@omp.ru> <6c03ffef-b2e0-16ba-35f3-206af2a611d2@gmail.com> <9d688cd8-99e3-0265-06aa-d44597e7686c@omp.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9d688cd8-99e3-0265-06aa-d44597e7686c@omp.ru> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 10:01:04PM +0300, Sergey Shtylyov wrote: > On 12/10/21 8:59 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > >>>>>>>> platform_get_irq() will print a message when it fails. > >>>>>>>> No need to repeat this. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> While at it, drop redundant check for 0 as platform_get_irq() spills > >>>>>>>> out a big WARN() in such case. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The reason you should be able to remove the "if (!irq)" test is that > >>>>>>> platform_get_irq() never returns 0. At least, that is what the function kdoc > >>>>>>> says. But looking at platform_get_irq_optional(), which is called by > >>>>>>> platform_get_irq(), the out label is: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> WARN(ret == 0, "0 is an invalid IRQ number\n"); > >>>>>>> return ret; > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> So 0 will be returned as-is. That is rather weird. That should be fixed to > >>>>>>> return -ENXIO: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> if (WARN(ret == 0, "0 is an invalid IRQ number\n")) > >>>>>>> return -ENXIO; > >>>>>>> return ret; > >>>>>> > >>>>>> My unmerged patch (https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=163623041902285) does this > >>>>>> but returns -EINVAL instead. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Otherwise, I do not think that removing the "if (!irq)" hunk is safe. no ? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Of course it isn't... > >>>>> > >>>>> It's unsubstantiated statement. The vIRQ 0 shouldn't be returned by any of > >>>>> those API calls. > >>>> > >>>> We do _not_ know what needs to be fixed, that's the problem, and that's why the WARN() > >>>> is there... > >>> > >>> So, have you seen this warning (being reported) related to libahci_platform? > >> > >> No (as if you need to really see this while it's obvious from the code review). > >> > >>> If no, what we are discussing about then? The workaround is redundant and > >> > >> I don't know. :-) Your arguments so far seem bogus (sorry! :-))... > > > > It seems you haven't got them at all. The problems of platform_get_irq() et al > > shouldn't be worked around in the callers. > > I have clearly explained to you what I'm working around there. If that wasn't clear > enough, I don't want to continue this talk anymore. Good luck with your patch (not this > one). Good luck with yours, not the one that touches platform_get_irq_optional() though! -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko