[PATCH 01/10 v3] Input: ep93xx_keypad: Fix platform_get_irq's error checking

[arvind.yadav.cs@gmail.com (arvindY)]

Hi Dmitry,

On Sunday 19 November 2017 12:00 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 04:25:08PM +0530, Arvind Yadav wrote:
>> The platform_get_irq() function returns negative if an error occurs.
>> zero or positive number on success. platform_get_irq() error checking
>> for zero is not correct.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> changes in v2:
>>                 Return keypad->irq insted of -ENXIO.
>> changes in v3 :
>>                 Add failure case '<= 0' instead of '< 0'. IRQ0 is not valid.
>>
>>   drivers/input/keyboard/ep93xx_keypad.c | 4 ++--
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/input/keyboard/ep93xx_keypad.c b/drivers/input/keyboard/ep93xx_keypad.c
>> index f77b295..01788a7 100644
>> --- a/drivers/input/keyboard/ep93xx_keypad.c
>> +++ b/drivers/input/keyboard/ep93xx_keypad.c
>> @@ -257,8 +257,8 @@ static int ep93xx_keypad_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>   	}
>>   
>>   	keypad->irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
>> -	if (!keypad->irq) {
>> -		err = -ENXIO;
>> +	if (keypad->irq <= 0) {
>> +		err = keypad->irq;
> Argh, so what will happen if you return with keypad->irq == 0? Can you
> please stop and consider what exactly  you are doing before churning
> patches like crazy?
Sorry for troubling you, I am sending updated patch of this( version - v4).
If you are ok with v4. Then I will send other patch.

Thanks,
>>   		goto failed_free;
>>   	}
>>   
>> -- 
>> 2.7.4
>>
> Thanks.
>