On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 12:45 PM Luis de Oliveira
<Luis.Oliveira@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 14:09:21
> > On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 5:38 PM Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 09:20:51PM +0200, Luis Oliveira wrote:
> > > > + of_id = of_match_node(dw_mipi_csi_of_match, dev->of_node);
> > > > + if (!of_id)
> > > > + return -EINVAL;
> >
> > Is it possible to have this asserted?
> >
>
> I will remove it.
But please double check that is really the case.
> > > > + ret = devm_request_irq(dev, csi->ctrl_irq_number,
> > > > + dw_mipi_csi_irq1, IRQF_SHARED,
> > > > + dev_name(dev), csi);
> > > > + if (ret) {
> > > > + dev_err(dev, "irq csi %s failed\n", of_id->name);
> > > > +
> > > > + goto end;
> > > > + }
> >
> > devm_*irq() might be a bad idea. Is it race free in your driver?
> >
>
> I never thought about it like that. Should I use request_irq and
> free_irq?
It's you, author of the driver, who knows it better :-)
> > I told once, can repeat again. Synopsys perhaps needs better reviews
> > inside company. Each time I see the code, it repeats same mistakes
> > over and over. Have you, guys, do something about it?
>
> We are working on it. It will get better, sorry.
Thanks! Hope to see a progress!
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
