Re: [PATCH] watchdog: ftwdt010_wdt: fix test for platform_get_irq() failure

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 10:52:13PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> Le 11/08/2022 à 12:56, Dan Carpenter a écrit :
> > This code assumes that platform_get_irq() function returns zero on
> > failure.  In fact, platform_get_irq() never returns zero.  It returns
> > negative error codes or positive non-zero values on success.
> > 
> > Fixes: eca10ae6000d ("watchdog: add driver for Cortina Gemini watchdog")
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   drivers/watchdog/ftwdt010_wdt.c | 2 +-
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/ftwdt010_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/ftwdt010_wdt.c
> > index 21dcc7765688..02112fc264bd 100644
> > --- a/drivers/watchdog/ftwdt010_wdt.c
> > +++ b/drivers/watchdog/ftwdt010_wdt.c
> > @@ -156,7 +156,7 @@ static int ftwdt010_wdt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >   	}
> >   	irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
> > -	if (irq) {
> > +	if (irq > 0) {
> >   		ret = devm_request_irq(dev, irq, ftwdt010_wdt_interrupt, 0,
> >   				       "watchdog bark", gwdt);
> >   		if (ret)
> 
> Hi,
> can't platform_get_irq() return 0?
> All the paths in platform_get_irq() look like 0 is a valid value.
> 
> The other patches you just sent are "< 0 ==> error", so ">= 0 ==> valid"
> 
> Any reason here for >0?

API documentation says:

* Return: non-zero IRQ number on success, negative error number on failure.

Also, 0 is not a valid interrupt number.

Guenter



[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [Kernel Announce]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Networking Development]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux