On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 03:04:24PM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> fwnode_irq_get[_byname]() were changed to not return 0 anymore.
>
> Drop check for return value 0.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matti Vaittinen <[email protected]>
Sorry, but I don't think you've properly considered the effects of your
patch.
> @@ -5833,7 +5833,7 @@ static int mvpp2_multi_queue_vectors_init(struct mvpp2_port *port,
> v->irq = of_irq_get_byname(port_node, irqname);
> else
> v->irq = fwnode_irq_get(port->fwnode, i);
> - if (v->irq <= 0) {
> + if (v->irq < 0) {
You're making this change based on the assumption that fwnode_irq_get()
has changed its return values, but I really don't think you've looked
at the code and considered the return value behaviour of the DT function
above. Reading it's documentation, it states that of_irq_get_byname()
may return 0 on IRQ mapping failure.
So, by making this change, you are allowing IRQ mapping failure in the
DT path to succeed rather than fail.
> ret = -EINVAL;
> goto err;
> }
> @@ -6764,7 +6764,7 @@ static int mvpp2_port_probe(struct platform_device *pdev,
> err = -EPROBE_DEFER;
> goto err_deinit_qvecs;
> }
> - if (port->port_irq <= 0)
> + if (port->port_irq < 0)
Exactly the same problem here, but...
> /* the link irq is optional */
> port->port_irq = 0;
this is less critical... but still wrong.
So, given that this patch is basically incorrect...
NAK.
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!