Return-path: Received: from ec2-52-27-115-49.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com ([52.27.115.49]:39573 "EHLO s-opensource.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755737AbcIFMMk (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Sep 2016 08:12:40 -0400 Subject: Re: mwifiex: propagate error if IRQ request fails in mwifiex_sdio_of() To: Kalle Valo References: <20160903103520.8C69C6201B@smtp.codeaurora.org> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Amitkumar Karwar , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Nishant Sarmukadam , Arend van Spriel From: Javier Martinez Canillas Message-ID: <66735eb5-c831-8e06-337b-80ccfc392061@osg.samsung.com> (sfid-20160906_141302_371384_9A7E9E05) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 14:12:33 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160903103520.8C69C6201B@smtp.codeaurora.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hello Kalle, On 09/03/2016 12:35 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: > Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >> If request_irq() fails in mwifiex_sdio_probe_of(), only an error message >> is printed but the actual error is not propagated to the caller function. >> >> Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas > > What's the conclusion with this patch? Should I drop it or take it? > > (The discussion is available from the patchwork link in the signature.) > My understanding is that Arend agrees with the patch and that the question raised was caused by looking at an older kernel version. IOW, the patch is OK and should be picked. I'm adding Arend to cc, so can comment in case I misunderstood him though. Best regards, -- Javier Martinez Canillas Open Source Group Samsung Research America