Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:8 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:8;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20231205-rkisp-irq-fix-v1-0-f4045c74ba45@ideasonboard.com> <20231205-rkisp-irq-fix-v1-2-f4045c74ba45@ideasonboard.com>
In-Reply-To: <20231205-rkisp-irq-fix-v1-2-f4045c74ba45@ideasonboard.com>
From:   Adam Ford <aford173@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 5 Dec 2023 05:57:48 -0600
Message-ID: <CAHCN7xJqw-hSD7rWfxFq5NWnF+=RrpCWR+js9358jAL0_WzVFw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] media: rkisp1: Fix IRQ handler return values
To:     Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ideasonboard.com>
Cc:     Dafna Hirschfeld <dafna@fastmail.com>,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
        Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
        Paul Elder <paul.elder@ideasonboard.com>,
        Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@ew.tq-group.com>,
        kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com, umang.jain@ideasonboard.com,
        linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 2:10=E2=80=AFAM Tomi Valkeinen
<tomi.valkeinen@ideasonboard.com> wrote:
>
> The IRQ handler rkisp1_isr() calls sub-handlers, all of which returns an
> irqreturn_t value, but rkisp1_isr() ignores those values and always
> returns IRQ_HANDLED.
>
> Fix this by collecting the return values, and returning IRQ_HANDLED or
> IRQ_NONE as appropriate.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ideasonboard.com>
> ---
>  drivers/media/platform/rockchip/rkisp1/rkisp1-dev.c | 18 ++++++++++++++-=
---
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/rockchip/rkisp1/rkisp1-dev.c b/driver=
s/media/platform/rockchip/rkisp1/rkisp1-dev.c
> index 76f93614b4cf..1d60f4b8bd09 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/platform/rockchip/rkisp1/rkisp1-dev.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/rockchip/rkisp1/rkisp1-dev.c
> @@ -445,17 +445,27 @@ static int rkisp1_entities_register(struct rkisp1_d=
evice *rkisp1)
>
>  static irqreturn_t rkisp1_isr(int irq, void *ctx)
>  {
> +       irqreturn_t ret;
> +
>         /*
>          * Call rkisp1_capture_isr() first to handle the frame that
>          * potentially completed using the current frame_sequence number =
before
>          * it is potentially incremented by rkisp1_isp_isr() in the verti=
cal
>          * sync.
>          */
> -       rkisp1_capture_isr(irq, ctx);
> -       rkisp1_isp_isr(irq, ctx);
> -       rkisp1_csi_isr(irq, ctx);
>
> -       return IRQ_HANDLED;
> +       ret =3D IRQ_NONE;
> +
> +       if (rkisp1_capture_isr(irq, ctx) =3D=3D IRQ_HANDLED)
> +               ret =3D IRQ_HANDLED;
> +
> +       if (rkisp1_isp_isr(irq, ctx) =3D=3D IRQ_HANDLED)
> +               ret =3D IRQ_HANDLED;
> +
> +       if (rkisp1_csi_isr(irq, ctx) =3D=3D IRQ_HANDLED)
> +               ret =3D IRQ_HANDLED;
> +

It seems like we're throwing away the value of ret each time the
subsequent if statement is evaluated.  Whether or not they return
didn't matter before, and the only one that seems using the return
code is the last one.

Wouldn't it be simpler to use ret =3D rkisp1_capture_isr(irq, ctx), ret
=3D rkisp1_isp_isr(irq, ctx) and ret =3D rkisp1_csi_isr(irq, ctx) if we
care about the return code?

How do you expect this to return if one of the first two don't return
IRQ_HANDLED?

adam

> +       return ret;
>  }
>
>  static const char * const px30_isp_clks[] =3D {
>
> --
> 2.34.1
>