lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Sep]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 04/10] irqdomain: Return errors from irq_create_of_mapping()
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 04:14:43PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 8:24 AM, Thierry Reding
> <thierry.reding@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Instead of returning 0 for all errors, allow the precise error code to
> > be propagated. This will be used in subsequent patches to allow further
> > propagation of error codes.
> >
> > The interrupt number corresponding to the new mapping is returned in an
> > output parameter so that the return value is reserved to signal success
> > (== 0) or failure (< 0).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
>
> One comment below, otherwise:
>
> Acked-by: Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>
>
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/pci-common.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/pci-common.c
> > index 905a24b..ae71b14 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/pci-common.c
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/pci-common.c
> > @@ -230,6 +230,7 @@ static int pci_read_irq_line(struct pci_dev *pci_dev)
> > {
> > struct of_irq oirq;
> > unsigned int virq;
> > + int ret;
> >
> > pr_debug("PCI: Try to map irq for %s...\n", pci_name(pci_dev));
> >
> > @@ -266,8 +267,10 @@ static int pci_read_irq_line(struct pci_dev *pci_dev)
> > oirq.size, oirq.specifier[0], oirq.specifier[1],
> > of_node_full_name(oirq.controller));
> >
> > - virq = irq_create_of_mapping(oirq.controller, oirq.specifier,
> > - oirq.size);
> > + ret = irq_create_of_mapping(oirq.controller, oirq.specifier,
> > + oirq.size, &virq);
> > + if (ret)
> > + virq = NO_IRQ;
> > }
> > if(virq == NO_IRQ) {
> > pr_debug(" Failed to map !\n");
>
> Can you get rid of NO_IRQ usage here instead of adding to it.

I was trying to stay consistent with the remainder of the code. PowerPC
is a pretty heavy user of NO_IRQ. Of all 348 references, more than half
(182) are in arch/powerpc, so I'd rather like to get a go-ahead from
Benjamin on this.

That said, perhaps we should just go all the way and get rid of NO_IRQ
for good. Things could get somewhat messy, though. There are a couple of
these spread through the code:

#ifndef NO_IRQ
#define NO_IRQ (-1)
#endif

And this isn't very encouraging either:

$ git grep 'irq.*=.*-1' | wc -l
638

Thierry
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-09-23 10:41    [W:0.103 / U:4.184 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site