From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
To: Jiasheng Jiang <jiasheng@iscas.ac.cn>,
andy.shevchenko@gmail.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
jirislaby@kernel.org, liviu.dudau@arm.com, sudeep.holla@arm.com,
lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com
Cc: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] serial: mps2-uart: Check for error irq
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2021 14:26:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5303e161-1e2b-4879-ccb7-f21ec2b503e0@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211223132733.1400381-1-jiasheng@iscas.ac.cn>
On 2021-12-23 13:27, Jiasheng Jiang wrote:
> On 2021-12-23 12:54, Robin Murphy wrote:
>>> Because of the possible failure of the platform_get_irq(), it should be
>>> better to check it to avoid the use of error irq.
>>
>> As far as I can see, the only "use" of error values is that they will be
>> passed to request_irq(), which will then return -EINVAL because they are
>> not valid IRQ numbers, and that error will be handled appropriately. I
>> think that's a relatively common pattern, so your commit message should
>> really describe why you think it's a problem and why this addition is a
>> meaningful improvement.
>
> Thanks for your reminder, and I correct my commit message as follow.
> If that's ok, I will correct my other patches like this.
>
> For the possible failure of the platform_get_irq(), the returned irq
> could be error number and will finally cause the failure of the request_irq().
> So it might be better to check just now in order to avoid the waste of
> later processes.
Even better, consider that platform_get_irq() can now in certain cases
return -EPROBE_DEFER, and the consequences of letting request_irq()
effectively convert that into -EINVAL, even at probe time rather than
later on ;)
Cheers,
Robin.
>
> Sincerely thanks,
> Jiasheng
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-12-23 14:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-12-23 13:27 Jiasheng Jiang
2021-12-23 14:26 ` Robin Murphy [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-12-23 12:14 Jiasheng Jiang
2021-12-23 12:54 ` Robin Murphy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5303e161-1e2b-4879-ccb7-f21ec2b503e0@arm.com \
--to=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=andy.shevchenko@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jiasheng@iscas.ac.cn \
--cc=jirislaby@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-serial@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liviu.dudau@arm.com \
--cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®