Hi Frans, Quoting Frans Klaver <franskla...@gmail.com>:
On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 6:42 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsi...@embeddedor.com> wrote:Propagate the return values of platform_get_irq and devm_request_irq on failure. Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsi...@embeddedor.com> --- drivers/clocksource/em_sti.c | 9 +++++---- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/em_sti.c b/drivers/clocksource/em_sti.c index bc48cbf..c4818dd 100644 --- a/drivers/clocksource/em_sti.c +++ b/drivers/clocksource/em_sti.c @@ -305,7 +305,7 @@ static int em_sti_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0); if (irq < 0) { dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to get irq\n"); - return -EINVAL; + return irq; } /* map memory, let base point to the STI instance */ @@ -314,11 +314,12 @@ static int em_sti_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) if (IS_ERR(p->base)) return PTR_ERR(p->base); - if (devm_request_irq(&pdev->dev, irq, em_sti_interrupt, + irq = devm_request_irq(&pdev->dev, irq, em_sti_interrupt, IRQF_TIMER | IRQF_IRQPOLL | IRQF_NOBALANCING, - dev_name(&pdev->dev), p)) { + dev_name(&pdev->dev), p); + if (irq) { dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to request low IRQ\n"); - return -ENOENT; + return irq; }This works. Yet I think that 'ret' would be a better candidate for taking the result of devm_request_irq, since it doesn't return the irq number on success. Should someone decide to reference irq at a later point in the code, this has to be changed.
Good point. I'll change it and send a new patch shortly. Thanks! -- Gustavo A. R. Silva
