Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210416034712.7891-1-zhuguangqing83@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210416034712.7891-1-zhuguangqing83@gmail.com>
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 16 Apr 2021 10:45:33 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJKOXPe+eK-2cZ2h-WUUrfPwkXrHGopaEmx0Kwjsa4Nqq0DyeA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: mt6360: Fix missing IRQF_ONESHOT as only
 threaded handler
To:     zhuguangqing83@gmail.com
Cc:     Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 at 06:30, <zhuguangqing83@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: Guangqing Zhu <zhuguangqing83@gmail.com>
>
> Coccinelle noticed:
> drivers/regulator/mt6360-regulator.c:386:8-33: ERROR: Threaded IRQ with no
> primary handler requested without IRQF_ONESHOT

This should be tested. There are several patches like this all over
the tree so it looks like "let's fix everything from Coccinelle"
because you ignored at least in some of the cases that the handler is
not the primary one. I am not saying that the change is bad, but
rather it looks automated.

Best regards,
Krzysztof