On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 10:13:38 +0200, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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@xxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > One comment below, otherwise: > > > > Acked-by: Rob Herring <rob.herring@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > 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 all of them are wrong and need to be removed. :-) We're /slowly/ getting rid of the -1 and the usage of NO_IRQ. A global search and replace of s/NO_IRQ/0/g can be very safely done on arch/powerpc since powerpc has had NO_IRQ set correctly to '0' for a very long time now. So, yes, if you're keen to do it I'd love to see a series getting rid of more NO_IRQ users. g. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html