IronPort-SDR: 09gwIkakBX+lEysYBNNpo763D5Rj9RaWwh4GccZ2ML/Ku5RaL5wugkwwOGDJV8E2f8SVcjBdOw
 LmL9lxjVXzriXG6Bpv5H5/PdjbtsHxITNyaqyqH5RwCiGN/3g2u65V3RQXiKSmadppZ/v5729j
 nUy5+2mUrxWo/RiWZ9WdTOQ3orVWWLoQScTgRPOI5h1njGAQBHPF0pC0K2Spg/Ifoumc/pva47
 siAafPLhID0zUImiO35SVTn5g1x6XyQFeyd0y49+iOkCjKL3rrTQgjC6jPHjh9zoOyrTjUZagY
 y3GAFMuqyOiyrTmgqX284B7S
IronPort-SDR: FpapL9tbRh6Kl1bYz2C8IeZliD2r8nTq9xoxD3xArp0klal296+HijBiyEN0FumOyXWSUyHCLQ
 A9Spgg6FxsACWxN2wHwFT9i7uizEFOIRdEjqGtOLuUOYdCSTRWP1m5oW2awjF5bCcehRaP8aaR
 MqMOub6bu+5iEs0AufW3Dv9WkhvyrFI6bXz1xN0FhuT/2Gk/iR01R5XYrK/ah5MhN5t1ypT792
 /gHhPtpOctK7eEq+oRH1h48oBZpmizwENw61bro6YgZdTe585f8nrxnUow5zPRysWYCeETFDHS
 Tik=
WDCIronportException: Internal
Message-ID: <549c1825-56e6-de9e-e109-77f0d06cfd0f@opensource.wdc.com>
Date:   Sat, 11 Dec 2021 08:45:51 +0900
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.4.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] ata: libahci_platform: Get rid of dup message when
 IRQ can't be retrieved
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@omp.ru>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
References: <20211209145937.77719-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
 <d91cf14d-c7d8-1c61-9071-102f38e8c924@opensource.wdc.com>
 <febc7f73-929f-d8a6-ea01-5056b9101b46@omp.ru>
From:   Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
Organization: Western Digital
In-Reply-To: <febc7f73-929f-d8a6-ea01-5056b9101b46@omp.ru>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 2021/12/10 17:59, Sergey Shtylyov wrote:
> On 12/10/21 1:49 AM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> 
>>> platform_get_irq() will print a message when it fails.
>>> No need to repeat this.
>>>
>>> While at it, drop redundant check for 0 as platform_get_irq() spills
>>> out a big WARN() in such case.
>>
>> The reason you should be able to remove the "if (!irq)" test is that
>> platform_get_irq() never returns 0. At least, that is what the function kdoc
>> says. But looking at platform_get_irq_optional(), which is called by
>> platform_get_irq(), the out label is:
>>
>> 	WARN(ret == 0, "0 is an invalid IRQ number\n");
>> 	return ret;
>>
>> So 0 will be returned as-is. That is rather weird. That should be fixed to
>> return -ENXIO:
>>
>> 	if (WARN(ret == 0, "0 is an invalid IRQ number\n"))
>> 		return -ENXIO;
>> 	return ret;
> 
>    My unmerged patch (https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=163623041902285) does this
> but returns -EINVAL instead.

Thinking more about this, shouldn't this change go into platform_get_irq()
instead of platform_get_irq_optional() ?

The way I see it, I think that the intended behavior for
platform_get_irq_optional() is:
1) If have IRQ, return it, always > 0
2) If no IRQ, return 0
3) If error, return < 0
no ?

And for platform_get_irq(), case (2) becomes an error.
Is this the intended semantic ?
I am really not sure here as the functions kdoc description and the code do not
match. Which one is correct ?

> 
>> Otherwise, I do not think that removing the "if (!irq)" hunk is safe. no ?
> 
>    Of course it isn't...
> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> [...]
> 
> MBR, Sergey


-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research