From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3E60C433F5 for ; Fri, 4 Mar 2022 18:12:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S241543AbiCDSM6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2022 13:12:58 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55986 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238403AbiCDSMr (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2022 13:12:47 -0500 Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D96681D0865; Fri, 4 Mar 2022 10:11:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1646417519; x=1677953519; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=Ymhrhqjpe7iYgeVft/Kn+RQXzNz7BxHaO/WuLNq0Oig=; b=d4Hp0jxBq702UVCi124uC4ZnTgiApQCi68pymYSuzvB5GYpMpGFPl5Ui PaaLb3gZXlZFf/jAhZl2soYdoO/pTz9I2PnTJq52oBJ7aemTtF3ikDwJj iy0rIeM8jStO/nKvqs0Xmerjif1PENLmAc7i98tgV8tJ6aBVf4UD1Nim2 o4KstBFTFwY1Y2oYePEX3ADtO5JeVh/50R/8w/y55cHHjOoH8fs/pVgAf YNSrGiJgCpb1GH9jYHy6byrrkgmtLi3T2nlOmW1ktkkB5bxPuUDDbhm0A ZdwvGeFNEtmiewJudbkRofdvY0gGgvALQPQRsETd1By0dJ8kLn3mkRKU5 Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10276"; a="252858221" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.90,155,1643702400"; d="scan'208";a="252858221" Received: from orsmga006.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.51]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 Mar 2022 10:11:59 -0800 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.90,155,1643702400"; d="scan'208";a="511936238" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.59]) by orsmga006-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 Mar 2022 10:11:57 -0800 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1nQCOU-00BKGo-SR; Fri, 04 Mar 2022 20:11:10 +0200 Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2022 20:11:10 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Zhiyong Tao , linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jiri Slaby , Matthias Brugger Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] serial: 8520_mtk: Prepare for platform_get_irq_optional() changes Message-ID: References: <20211217181547.48182-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20211217181547.48182-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 08:15:47PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > The platform_get_irq_optional() is going to be changed in a way > that the result of it: > = 0 means no IRQ is provided > < 0 means the error which needs to be propagated to the upper layers > > 0 valid vIRQ is allocated > > In this case, drop check for 0. Note, the 0 is not valid vIRQ and > platform_get_irq_optional() issues a big WARN() in such case, > > It's safe to assume that 0 is not valid IRQ in this case since > the driver is only instantiated via Device Tree and corresponding > OF APIs should never ever return 0 for valid IRQ. Otherwise it is > a regression there. Can it be applied now? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko