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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76F56C4332D for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:48:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5264020732 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:48:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727304AbgCSIsV (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Mar 2020 04:48:21 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]:59784 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727053AbgCSIsB (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Mar 2020 04:48:01 -0400 Received: from p5de0bf0b.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([93.224.191.11] helo=nanos.tec.linutronix.de) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1jEqqD-0002xp-G4; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 09:47:49 +0100 Received: by nanos.tec.linutronix.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id AB625103088; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 09:47:47 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: Marc Gonzalez , Aman Sharma , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Thomas Petazzoni , Andrew Murray , Linus Walleij , Ryder Lee , Karthikeyan Mitran , Hou Zhiqiang , Mans Rullgard , Matthias Brugger , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, Marc Zyngier Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] pci: handled return value of platform_get_irq correctly In-Reply-To: <20200318222238.GA247500@google.com> References: <20200318222238.GA247500@google.com> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 09:47:47 +0100 Message-ID: <877dzgennw.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Bjorn Helgaas writes: > On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 02:42:48PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> Bjorn Helgaas writes: >> > On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 04:56:42PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >> >> On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 10:05:58PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> >> > > 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. >> >> I don't know what I was looking at. >> >> platform_get_irq() does the right thing already, so checking for irq < 0 >> is sufficient. >> >> Sorry for the confusion! > > Thanks, I was indeed confused! Maybe we could reduce future confusion > by strengthening the comments slightly, e.g., > > - * Return: IRQ number on success, negative error number on failure. > + * Return: non-zero IRQ number on success, negative error number on failure. > > I don't want to push my luck, but it's pretty hard to prove that > platform_get_irq() never returns 0. What would you think of something > like the following? No objections from my side. 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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23599C4332E for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:48:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED70320732 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:48:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="UgulxlOe" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org ED70320732 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-mediatek-bounces+linux-mediatek=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:References :In-Reply-To:Subject:To:From:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=MCQmctvqLcJVlrswX4EhLpUFhWDqeZEzYDpn+83MHAI=; b=UgulxlOe+w0nwu 7fx75WDiDE3e8mjYPR6KtLaCSNayeGRIvQfZAjtyQoDQwt6O0brkMAGnyTLu1qu1MsyPXUuiWXF4H JN8VZawpQYwds0sYcu1LS2VExw0OFQrN46KF4n91HRySMSaQ00ULJv2z7KtFvDiniAjZnueWAyMP8 I0iY1cLRVt4SBGPYg4OijsJqYKTnIZHJy+lELVThz0pevuRq0ZTLvwK0O0Qp4Pdf0wLyH1+VLh4bl Cjws5HTHxd0q8oRW03b3hjlyZHTjs/PG05JbGwzhKQEqxC/qEE3Wel+JQBara12WMGz9kJpZ9DWGl kdkqF6xpOF+uPm5NTTsw==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jEqqU-0005ox-Ln; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:48:06 +0000 Received: from galois.linutronix.de ([2a0a:51c0:0:12e:550::1]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jEqqJ-0005f0-UQ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:47:57 +0000 Received: from p5de0bf0b.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([93.224.191.11] helo=nanos.tec.linutronix.de) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1jEqqD-0002xp-G4; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 09:47:49 +0100 Received: by nanos.tec.linutronix.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id AB625103088; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 09:47:47 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Bjorn Helgaas Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] pci: handled return value of platform_get_irq correctly In-Reply-To: <20200318222238.GA247500@google.com> References: <20200318222238.GA247500@google.com> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 09:47:47 +0100 Message-ID: <877dzgennw.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1, SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200319_014756_124728_A32A3AA7 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 15.10 ) X-BeenThere: linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi , Karthikeyan Mitran , Marc Gonzalez , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Linus Walleij , Aman Sharma , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ryder Lee , linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, Thomas Petazzoni , Marc Zyngier , Matthias Brugger , Mans Rullgard , Hou Zhiqiang , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Andrew Murray Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "Linux-mediatek" Errors-To: linux-mediatek-bounces+linux-mediatek=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Bjorn Helgaas writes: > On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 02:42:48PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> Bjorn Helgaas writes: >> > On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 04:56:42PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >> >> On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 10:05:58PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> >> > > 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. >> >> I don't know what I was looking at. >> >> platform_get_irq() does the right thing already, so checking for irq < 0 >> is sufficient. >> >> Sorry for the confusion! > > Thanks, I was indeed confused! Maybe we could reduce future confusion > by strengthening the comments slightly, e.g., > > - * Return: IRQ number on success, negative error number on failure. > + * Return: non-zero IRQ number on success, negative error number on failure. > > I don't want to push my luck, but it's pretty hard to prove that > platform_get_irq() never returns 0. What would you think of something > like the following? No objections from my side. _______________________________________________ Linux-mediatek mailing list Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek 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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B70FCC4332D for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:48:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3231F20740 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:48:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="uawpgzxG" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3231F20740 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:References :In-Reply-To:Subject:To:From:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=mV2XuxQi+jXnYwCE9AftotTiCdTYDh/8ZxTQuzCVJXQ=; b=uawpgzxG+/xioK 9efYDObCQjFW8FqGr0vFIyRfuaiu8ac7Df0fgxFUX75UDHVqKZu/044Uy4PzPI3teWJgqSElg4Bt8 dI40by5zHgBAhGMksM7jR2A85pqM9ow5+rcRHF1z2VVzIZdo8L7edo1Rle12/7WAuQzoK51MQGtOR ee3c+p3+eJqs+/q/4omUeAQ46gRxSRr7BoUDEPDbA7LdK2+/fBbKHIjZFLNtKpGW3GaKxoFqstrM9 cgsnO5pxcBaKmGqrck1PmrfaVsF7cQvatdJsNjNqNr77eq0+xLWmWGaF3bCg3PbaKvO0yKtD48NhZ 8kc5Izs+Eu3Q52F7t4cg==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jEqqN-0005gL-Im; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:47:59 +0000 Received: from galois.linutronix.de ([2a0a:51c0:0:12e:550::1]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jEqqJ-0005f0-UQ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:47:57 +0000 Received: from p5de0bf0b.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([93.224.191.11] helo=nanos.tec.linutronix.de) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1jEqqD-0002xp-G4; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 09:47:49 +0100 Received: by nanos.tec.linutronix.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id AB625103088; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 09:47:47 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Bjorn Helgaas Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] pci: handled return value of platform_get_irq correctly In-Reply-To: <20200318222238.GA247500@google.com> References: <20200318222238.GA247500@google.com> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 09:47:47 +0100 Message-ID: <877dzgennw.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1, SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200319_014756_124728_A32A3AA7 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 15.10 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi , Karthikeyan Mitran , Marc Gonzalez , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Linus Walleij , Aman Sharma , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ryder Lee , linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, Thomas Petazzoni , Marc Zyngier , Matthias Brugger , Mans Rullgard , Hou Zhiqiang , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Andrew Murray Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Bjorn Helgaas writes: > On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 02:42:48PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> Bjorn Helgaas writes: >> > On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 04:56:42PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >> >> On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 10:05:58PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> >> > > 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. >> >> I don't know what I was looking at. >> >> platform_get_irq() does the right thing already, so checking for irq < 0 >> is sufficient. >> >> Sorry for the confusion! > > Thanks, I was indeed confused! Maybe we could reduce future confusion > by strengthening the comments slightly, e.g., > > - * Return: IRQ number on success, negative error number on failure. > + * Return: non-zero IRQ number on success, negative error number on failure. > > I don't want to push my luck, but it's pretty hard to prove that > platform_get_irq() never returns 0. What would you think of something > like the following? No objections from my side. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel