[PATCH v2] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Do not use platform_get_irq() to count interrupts

[PATCH v2] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Do not use platform_get_irq() to count interrupts

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

As platform_get_irq() now prints an error when the interrupt does not
exist, counting interrupts by looping until failure causes the printing
of scary messages like:

    sh-pfc e6060000.pin-controller: IRQ index 0 not found

Fix this by using the platform_irq_count() helper instead.

Fixes: 7723f4c5ecdb8d83 ("driver core: platform: Add an error message to platform_get_irq*()")
Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
Reviewed-by: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@renesas.com>
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@ragnatech.se>
Tested-by: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@renesas.com>
---
v2:
  - Add Reviewed-by, Tested-by.

Linus: Can you please take this one, as it is a fix for v5.4? Thx!
---
 drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c | 16 ++++++----------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c
index 1745c0639932c7a7..a5a794cbf997f7a3 100644
--- a/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c
@@ -29,12 +29,12 @@
 static int sh_pfc_map_resources(struct sh_pfc *pfc,
 				struct platform_device *pdev)
 {
-	unsigned int num_windows, num_irqs;
 	struct sh_pfc_window *windows;
 	unsigned int *irqs = NULL;
+	unsigned int num_windows;
 	struct resource *res;
 	unsigned int i;
-	int irq;
+	int num_irqs;
 
 	/* Count the MEM and IRQ resources. */
 	for (num_windows = 0;; num_windows++) {
@@ -42,17 +42,13 @@ static int sh_pfc_map_resources(struct sh_pfc *pfc,
 		if (!res)
 			break;
 	}
-	for (num_irqs = 0;; num_irqs++) {
-		irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, num_irqs);
-		if (irq == -EPROBE_DEFER)
-			return irq;
-		if (irq < 0)
-			break;
-	}
-
 	if (num_windows == 0)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
+	num_irqs = platform_irq_count(pdev);
+	if (num_irqs < 0)
+		return num_irqs;
+
 	/* Allocate memory windows and IRQs arrays. */
 	windows = devm_kcalloc(pfc->dev, num_windows, sizeof(*windows),
 			       GFP_KERNEL);
-- 
2.17.1

Re: [PATCH v2] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Do not use platform_get_irq() to count interrupts

[Linus Walleij]

On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 4:26 PM Geert Uytterhoeven
<geert+renesas@glider.be> wrote:

> As platform_get_irq() now prints an error when the interrupt does not
> exist, counting interrupts by looping until failure causes the printing
> of scary messages like:
>
>     sh-pfc e6060000.pin-controller: IRQ index 0 not found
>
> Fix this by using the platform_irq_count() helper instead.
>
> Fixes: 7723f4c5ecdb8d83 ("driver core: platform: Add an error message to platform_get_irq*()")
> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
> Reviewed-by: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@renesas.com>
> Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>
> Reviewed-by: Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@ragnatech.se>
> Tested-by: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@renesas.com>
> ---
> v2:
>   - Add Reviewed-by, Tested-by.
>
> Linus: Can you please take this one, as it is a fix for v5.4? Thx!

I'm not sure the little error message counts as
a regression, certainly users can live with it.

Can't you just put it in your queue for the next kernel?

Yours,
Linus Walleij

Re: [PATCH v2] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Do not use platform_get_irq() to count interrupts

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Linus,

On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 2:07 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 4:26 PM Geert Uytterhoeven
> <geert+renesas@glider.be> wrote:
> > As platform_get_irq() now prints an error when the interrupt does not
> > exist, counting interrupts by looping until failure causes the printing
> > of scary messages like:
> >
> >     sh-pfc e6060000.pin-controller: IRQ index 0 not found
> >
> > Fix this by using the platform_irq_count() helper instead.
> >
> > Fixes: 7723f4c5ecdb8d83 ("driver core: platform: Add an error message to platform_get_irq*()")
> > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
> > Reviewed-by: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@renesas.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>
> > Reviewed-by: Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@ragnatech.se>
> > Tested-by: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@renesas.com>
> > ---
> > v2:
> >   - Add Reviewed-by, Tested-by.
> >
> > Linus: Can you please take this one, as it is a fix for v5.4? Thx!
>
> I'm not sure the little error message counts as
> a regression, certainly users can live with it.

Several similar fixes have already made it upstream.
But the decision is up to you.

> Can't you just put it in your queue for the next kernel?

Sure, will do (after ELC-E), if you prefer.

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

Re: [PATCH v2] pinctrl: sh-pfc: Do not use platform_get_irq() to count interrupts

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Linus,

On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 2:35 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 2:07 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 4:26 PM Geert Uytterhoeven
> > <geert+renesas@glider.be> wrote:
> > > As platform_get_irq() now prints an error when the interrupt does not
> > > exist, counting interrupts by looping until failure causes the printing
> > > of scary messages like:
> > >
> > >     sh-pfc e6060000.pin-controller: IRQ index 0 not found
> > >
> > > Fix this by using the platform_irq_count() helper instead.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 7723f4c5ecdb8d83 ("driver core: platform: Add an error message to platform_get_irq*()")
> > > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
> > > Reviewed-by: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@renesas.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>
> > > Reviewed-by: Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@ragnatech.se>
> > > Tested-by: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@renesas.com>
> > > ---
> > > v2:
> > >   - Add Reviewed-by, Tested-by.
> > >
> > > Linus: Can you please take this one, as it is a fix for v5.4? Thx!
> >
> > I'm not sure the little error message counts as
> > a regression, certainly users can live with it.
>
> Several similar fixes have already made it upstream.
> But the decision is up to you.
>
> > Can't you just put it in your queue for the next kernel?
>
> Sure, will do (after ELC-E), if you prefer.

Queuing in sh-pfc-for-v5.5.

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