On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 03/10/14 02:25, Fabio Estevam wrote:
>> From: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> There is no need to pass a 'fake' return value when platform_get_irq() fails.
>>
>> Propagate the real error instead.
>>
>> While at it, only consider negative numbers returned by platform_get_irq()
>> as error.
> Returning an irq of 0 is still invalid isn't it?
> (there was a lot of 'fun' making this true for Arm a few years back).
> Doesn't it effectively mean no irq is present?
In practice I cannot see how platform_get_irq() could return 0. Only
if the dtsi was providing 0 as the irq number for the vf610-adc
driver, which would mean a very broken dtsi.
This driver is used only by vf610 and imx6sx and their dtsi provide
the correct values for the adc irq.
This type of check:
if (irq < 0)
return irq;
is commonly used on the imx drivers and I was not aware of any
problems in this regard.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
