Re: [PATCH] driver core: platform: Rename platform_get_irq_optional() to platform_get_irq_silent()

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 10:47:06PM +0300, Sergey Shtylyov wrote:
> On 1/19/22 9:51 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

> >>>>> It'd certainly be good to name anything that doesn't correspond to one
> >>>>> of the existing semantics for the API (!) something different rather
> >>>>> than adding yet another potentially overloaded meaning.
> >>>>
> >>>> It seems we're (at least) three who agree about this. Here is a patch
> >>>> fixing the name.
> >>>
> >>> And similar number of people are on the other side.
> >>
> >> If someone already opposed to the renaming (and not only the name) I
> >> must have missed that.
> >>
> >> So you think it's a good idea to keep the name
> >> platform_get_irq_optional() despite the "not found" value returned by it
> >> isn't usable as if it were a normal irq number?
> > 
> > I meant that on the other side people who are in favour of Sergey's patch.
> > Since that I commented already that I opposed the renaming being a standalone
> > change.
> > 
> > Do you agree that we have several issues with platform_get_irq*() APIs?
> > 
> > 1. The unfortunate naming
> 
>    Mmm, "what's in a name?"... is this the topmost prio issue?

The order is arbitrary.

> > 2. The vIRQ0 handling: a) WARN() followed by b) returned value 0
> 
>    This is the most severe issue, I think...
> 
> > 3. The specific cookie for "IRQ not found, while no error happened" case

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko