On 9/6/2015 8:50 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 9/6/2015 7:16 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> On 9/6/2015 1:46 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 8:14 PM, Frank Rowand <frowand.l...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 9/4/2015 12:12 PM, David Daney wrote:
>>>>> From: David Daney <david.da...@cavium.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> It is perfectly legitimate for a PCI device to have an
>>>>> PCI_INTERRUPT_PIN value of zero. This happens if the device doesn't
>>>>> use interrupts, or on PCIe devices, where only MSI/MSI-X are
>>>>> supported.
>>>>>
>>>>> Silence the annoying "of_irq_parse_pci() failed with rc=-19" error
>>>>> messages by making them conditional on !-ENODEV (which can only be
>>>>> produced in the PCI_INTERRUPT_PIN == 0 case).
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: David Daney <david.da...@cavium.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> drivers/of/of_pci_irq.c | 4 +++-
>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/of/of_pci_irq.c b/drivers/of/of_pci_irq.c
>>>>> index 1710d9d..33d242a 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/of/of_pci_irq.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/of/of_pci_irq.c
>>>>> @@ -106,7 +106,9 @@ int of_irq_parse_and_map_pci(const struct pci_dev
>>>>> *dev, u8 slot, u8 pin)
>>>>>
>>>>> ret = of_irq_parse_pci(dev, &oirq);
>>>>> if (ret) {
>>>>> - dev_err(&dev->dev, "of_irq_parse_pci() failed with
>>>>> rc=%d\n", ret);
>>>>> + if (ret != -ENODEV)
>>>>> + dev_err(&dev->dev,
>>>>> + "of_irq_parse_pci() failed with rc=%d\n",
>>>>> ret);
>>>>> return 0; /* Proper return code 0 == NO_IRQ */
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is not safe to assume that the functions that of_irq_parse_pci() calls
>>>> will never be modified to return -ENODEV, thus resulting in
>>>> of_irq_parse_pci()
>>>> returning -ENODEV for a reason other than PCI_INTERRUPT_PIN == 0.
>>>
>>> Yes, but we're talking about a print statement.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> A more robust solution would be something like:
>>
>> < snip my bad solution >
>>
>>>> I'm not sure I like my solution, there might be a better way.
>>>
>>> I don't like it. That's way too complex for just silencing an
>>> erroneous error message.
>>>
>>> Perhaps just move the error message into of_irq_parse_pci and then you
>>> can control the print more easily. Or just change to dev_dbg would be
>>> okay by me.
>>
>> I knew I was making it way too hard. Yes, just move the error message
>> to of_irq_parse_pci(), where the "/* No pin, exit */" test occurs.
>
> And this time I replied too quickly, not really thinking through my comment.
> There are several error return points in of_irq_parse_pci(), so moving the
> error message into of_irq_parse_pci() is not the answer.
is not the answer unless
of_irq_parse_pci()
is changed over to the single point of return style.
I realized I should have typed the whole thought...
-Frank
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
