> On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 11:12:20AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 9:53 AM Uwe Kleine-König > > <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > The patch is fine given the changed behaviour of platform_get_irq. I > > > wonder if it is sensible to introduce a variant of platform_get_irq > > > (say > > > platform_get_irq_nowarn) that behaves like __platform_get_irq does > > > today. Then the imx driver would just call platform_get_irq_nowarn > > > without having to check the number of available irqs first. > > > > It's being discussed in parallel thread about > > platform_get_irq_optional() which won't issue a warning. > > This is even already in 5.4-rc1 as > 8973ea47901c81a1912bd05f1577bed9b5b52506. Great, I will send out a V2 using platform_get_irq_optional() for second/third IRQ. Thanks, Anson
