On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 07:15:44AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> NO_IRQ is used to check the return of irq_of_parse_and_map().
>
> On some architecture NO_IRQ is 0, on other architectures it is -1.
>
> irq_of_parse_and_map() returns 0 on error, independent of NO_IRQ.
This isn't clear. Does absence of an irq count as an error? In other
words, will irq_of_parse_and_map() sometimes return 0 and other times
return NO_IRQ? What about architectures on which 0 is a valid irq
number?
> So use 0 instead of using NO_IRQ.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/usb/host/ehci-grlib.c | 2 +-
> drivers/usb/host/ehci-ppc-of.c | 2 +-
> drivers/usb/host/fhci-hcd.c | 2 +-
> drivers/usb/host/ohci-ppc-of.c | 2 +-
> drivers/usb/host/uhci-grlib.c | 2 +-
> 5 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ehci-grlib.c b/drivers/usb/host/ehci-grlib.c
> index a2c3b4ec8a8b..0717f2ccf49d 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/host/ehci-grlib.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/ehci-grlib.c
> @@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ static int ehci_hcd_grlib_probe(struct platform_device *op)
> hcd->rsrc_len = resource_size(&res);
>
> irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(dn, 0);
> - if (irq == NO_IRQ) {
> + if (!irq) {
> dev_err(&op->dev, "%s: irq_of_parse_and_map failed\n",
> __FILE__);
> rv = -EBUSY;
Since NO_IRQ is sometimes set to -1, shouldn't this test (and all the
other ones you changed) really be doing:
if (!irq || irq == NO_IRQ) { ...
?
Alan Stern
