On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 11:19:31AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 09:34:44PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > Interrupt number 0 (returned by platform_get_irq()) might be a valid IRQ
> > so do not treat it as an error. If interrupt 0 was configured, the driver
> > would exit the probe early, before finishing initialization, but with
> > 0-exit status.
>
> The official position (as stated by Linus) is that interrupt zero is
> not a valid interrupt for peripheral drivers (it may be valid within
> architecture code for things like the x86 PIT, but nothing else.)
>
> You need to number your platform interrupts from one rather than zero.
>
> Note that there have been patches proposed to make platform_get_irq()
> return an error rather than returning a value of zero, so changing
> the driver in this way is not a good idea.
>
Those patches to make platform_get_irq() return error codes were merged
12 years ago in commit 305b3228f9ff ("[PATCH] driver core:
platform_get_irq*(): return -ENXIO on error").
This patch just drops the check for zero which is should be fine.
regards,
dan carpenter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
