Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752122AbaGZP5K (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jul 2014 11:57:10 -0400 Received: from mail-la0-f51.google.com ([209.85.215.51]:60874 "EHLO mail-la0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751820AbaGZP5I (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jul 2014 11:57:08 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <53D3CA66.8080408@oracle.com> References: <1406119899-22659-1-git-send-email-sasha.levin@oracle.com> <53CFC170.9090505@roeck-us.net> <53D3CA66.8080408@oracle.com> Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 17:57:06 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: voZx3iT_aGShjqkQeFuaaNLBvn4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] m68k/q40: Revert "m68k/q40: Fix q40_irq_startup() to return -ENXIO on failures" From: Geert Uytterhoeven To: Sasha Levin Cc: Guenter Roeck , Steven Rostedt , One Thousand Gnomes , Nick Krause , "Linux/m68k" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Sasha Levin , Thomas Gleixner , Richard Zidlicky Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Sasha Levin wrote: > On 07/26/2014 11:21 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> I applied Nick's cleanup (which is not yet in mainline, just in the m68k repo) >> because I thought Nick was right (in this particular case ;-), cfr. my >> reasoning in www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg1774736.html >> >> W.r.t. the signess, I didn't see the compiler warning, as the version of gcc >> I'm using didn't print that warning. However, irq_startup() converts the >> value returned by .irq_startup() from unsigned to signed. >> I assume this is just a missing conversion when the genirq framework >> itself was introduced (m68k was converted quite late)? >> >> W.r.t. the actual value, any non-zero value is treated the same. >> I can change it to 1, if that makes you feel better. If returning a non-zero >> value here is wrong, presumable the code has been wrong since it >> incarnation. >> >> As we're close to the opening of the merge window, it would be nice >> if we could conclude on this ;-) > > From my standpoint there are two issues here: > > 1. The whole signed/unsigned mishmash here. Pretty much any solution > besides implicitly converting a signed value into an unsigned one > which then gets treated as something else entirely should be acceptable > here. > > 2. Beyond semantics, the original patch also changed the behaviour of > the code. What previously was a soft printk() is now a hard error. > Does it break any systems? Cornercases? I dunno, but I can assure you > that this wasn't tested at all. If it broke something, it was most probably broken before commit c288bf2533e57174b90b07860c4391bcd1ea269c ("m68k/irq: Rename irq_controller to irq_chip"), too. It seems the Q40 hardware cannot handle this case, so considering this a hard error looks fine to me (CC Richard Zidlicky). > To sum it up, a solution would be welcome. The patch you currently have > in the m68k repo isn't a solution. OK, reverted. Thanks! 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 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/