On 12/01/16 19:13, Tuan Phan wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 07/11/15 00:51, Loc Ho wrote:
>>> The function acpi_gsi_to_irq should returns 0 on success as upper function
>>> caller expect an 0 for sucesss.
>>
>> I have to ask: why do you feel the need to change an API that behaves
>> like the rest of the IRQ allocation functions (at least when it comes to
>> its return value)?
>>
>> 0 is defined as an invalid interrupt, and I wish it stayed that way.
>
> The upper caller expects 0 for success.
> In drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c:
> case ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_EXTERNAL:
> /* External interrupt vector is GSI */
> rc = acpi_gsi_to_irq(generic->notify.vector, &ghes->irq);
> if (rc) {
> pr_err(GHES_PFX "Failed to map GSI to IRQ for
> generic hardware error source: %d\n",
> generic->header.source_id);
> goto err_edac_unreg;
> }
>
> Also the implementation of acpi_gsi_to_irq for X86 in
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c also return 0 for success and -1 for
> failure.
> int acpi_gsi_to_irq(u32 gsi, unsigned int *irqp)
> {
> int rc, irq, trigger, polarity;
>
> if (acpi_irq_model == ACPI_IRQ_MODEL_PIC) {
> *irqp = gsi;
> return 0;
> }
>
> rc = acpi_get_override_irq(gsi, &trigger, &polarity);
> if (rc == 0) {
> trigger = trigger ? ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE : ACPI_EDGE_SENSITIVE;
> polarity = polarity ? ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW : ACPI_ACTIVE_HIGH;
> irq = acpi_register_gsi(NULL, gsi, trigger, polarity);
> if (irq >= 0) {
> *irqp = irq;
> return 0;
> }
> }
>
> return -1;
> }
>
Right. In which case please document this properly in the commit log.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
