On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 12:00:25 +0300 Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 05:43:54PM +0100, Marek Behún wrote: > > +/** > > + * devm_irq_create_mapping - Resource managed version of irq_create_mapping() > > + * @dev: Device which lifetime the mapping is bound to > > + * @domain: domain owning this hardware interrupt or NULL for default domain > > + * @hwirq: hardware irq number in that domain space > > + * > > + * Create an irq mapping to linux irq space which is automatically disposed when > > + * the driver is detached. > > + * devm_irq_create_mapping() can be used to omit the explicit > > + * irq_dispose_mapping() call when driver is detached. > > + * > > + * Returns a linux irq number on success, 0 if mapping could not be created, or > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > + * a negative error number if devm action could not be added. > > + */ > > +static inline int devm_irq_create_mapping(struct device *dev, > > + struct irq_domain *domain, > > + irq_hw_number_t hwirq) > > +{ > > + unsigned int virq = irq_create_mapping(domain, hwirq); > > + > > + if (!virq) > > + return 0; > > What is the point of returning zero instead of an error code? Neither > of the callers that are introduced later in the patchset use this. > > I understand that it matches some of the other legacy irq function > behaviors, but I think we are trying to move away from that because it > just leads to bugs. > > Since we don't need the zero now, let's wait until we have a user before > introducing this behavior. Then we can add a new function that returns > zero, but we'll still encourage people to use the standard error code > function where possible. And at the same time, when we do introduce the > zero is an error code, function you should contact > kernel-janitors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx so someone an write a static checker > rule to detect the bugs that result from it. Hi Dan, the first user of this function is the very next patch of this series, and it does this: + irq = devm_irq_create_mapping(dev, mcu->gc.irq.domain, irq_idx); + if (irq <= 0) + return dev_err_probe(dev, irq ?: -ENXIO, + "Cannot map MESSAGE_SIGNED IRQ\n"); So it handles !irq as -ENXIO. I looked into several users who do virq = irq_create_mapping() and then reutrn errno if !virq: git grep -A 3 'virq = irq_create_mapping' Some return -ENOMEM, some -ENXIO, some -EINVAL. What do you think? Or should I send this driver without introducing this helper for now? Marek