On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 11:21:06AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 01:43:35PM +0800, James Tai wrote:
> > +static int realtek_intc_subset(struct device_node *node, struct realtek_intc_data *data, int index)
> > +{
> > + struct realtek_intc_subset_data *subset_data = &data->subset_data[index];
> > + const struct realtek_intc_subset_cfg *cfg = &data->info->cfg[index];
> > + int irq;
> > +
> > + irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(node, index);
> > + if (irq <= 0)
> > + return irq;
>
> I don't think irq_of_parse_and_map() can return negatives. Only zero
> on error. Returning zero on error is a historical artifact with IRQ
> functions and a constant source of bugs. But here returning zero is
> success. See my blog for more details:
> https://staticthinking.wordpress.com/2023/08/07/writing-a-check-for-zero-irq-error-codes/
It's worse than that. The irq functions historically returned NO_IRQ on
error, but that could be 0 or -1 depending on the arch.
Use of_irq_get() instead. It's a bit better in that it returns an error
code for most cases. But still returns 0 on mapping failure.
Rob
