Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 18 Apr 2022 23:13:36 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@linux.microsoft.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>, Lei Wang <lewan@microsoft.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
        Sinan Kaya <okaya@kernel.org>,
        Shiping Ji <shiping.linux@gmail.com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
        Robert Richter <rric@kernel.org>, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] EDAC/dmc520: Don't print an error for each unconfigured
 interrupt line
Message-ID: <Yl3UgPtVV3t4pzVe@zn.tnic>
References: <YeRkGvestiloCAUV@zn.tnic>
 <20220118152816.GA89184@sequoia>
 <Yeb4sK+ZmSHjWPWL@zn.tnic>
 <20220118195401.GB89184@sequoia>
 <YecrXidqecoYI/xg@zn.tnic>
 <YefXQHXNlsxk8yUc@kroah.com>
 <Yefb7zO9p1iPF3Jm@zn.tnic>
 <YefnuCPwMq5V2lgl@kroah.com>
 <20220404215640.GA626436@sequoia>
 <20220418204029.GA31854@sequoia>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220418204029.GA31854@sequoia>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 03:40:29PM -0500, Tyler Hicks wrote:
> > The API argument seems to have fizzled out in v2:
> > 
> >  https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220212201631.12648-1-s.shtylyov@omp.ru/

I don't see those two upstream yet, on a quick glance. Perhaps in Greg's tree?

Greg, what's the latest with that platform_get_*_optional() fun?

Also, the second of those two patches above has:

+ * Return: non-zero IRQ number on success, 0 if IRQ wasn't found, negative error
+ * number on failure.
  */
 int platform_get_irq_byname_optional(struct platform_device *dev,

and your patch does:

+		irq = platform_get_irq_byname_optional(pdev, dmc520_irq_configs[idx].name);
 		irqs[idx] = irq;

so on failure, it would still write the negative error value in
irqs[idx].

How can that be right?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette