[PATCH v5 02/22] thermal/drivers/sun8i: convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe()

[PATCH v5 02/22] thermal/drivers/sun8i: convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe()

[Yangtao Li]

There are more than 700 calls to devm_request_threaded_irq method and
more than 1000 calls to devm_request_irq method. Most drivers only
request one interrupt resource, and these error messages are basically
the same. If error messages are printed everywhere, more than 2000 lines
of code can be saved by removing the msg in the driver.

And tglx point out that:

  If we actually look at the call sites of
  devm_request_threaded_irq() then the vast majority of them print more or
  less lousy error messages. A quick grep/sed/awk/sort/uniq revealed

     519 messages total (there are probably more)

     352 unique messages

     323 unique messages after lower casing

         Those 323 are mostly just variants of the same patterns with
         slight modifications in formatting and information provided.

     186 of these messages do not deliver any useful information,
         e.g. "no irq", "

     The most useful one of all is: "could request wakeup irq: %d"

  So there is certainly an argument to be made that this particular
  function should print a well formatted and informative error message.

  It's not a general allocator like kmalloc(). It's specialized and in the
  vast majority of cases failing to request the interrupt causes the
  device probe to fail. So having proper and consistent information why
  the device cannot be used _is_ useful.

So convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe() API, which ensure that all
error handling branches print error information.

In this way, when this function fails, the upper-layer functions can
directly return an error code without missing debugging information.
Otherwise, the error message will be printed redundantly or missing.

Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
Cc: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno  <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
Signed-off-by: Yangtao Li <frank.li@vivo.com>
Acked-by: Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/thermal/sun8i_thermal.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/thermal/sun8i_thermal.c b/drivers/thermal/sun8i_thermal.c
index 195f3c5d0b38..a952804ff993 100644
--- a/drivers/thermal/sun8i_thermal.c
+++ b/drivers/thermal/sun8i_thermal.c
@@ -512,9 +512,9 @@ static int sun8i_ths_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	 * registered yet, we deffer the registration of the interrupt to
 	 * the end.
 	 */
-	ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(dev, irq, NULL,
-					sun8i_irq_thread,
-					IRQF_ONESHOT, "ths", tmdev);
+	ret = devm_request_threaded_irq_probe(dev, irq, NULL,
+					      sun8i_irq_thread,
+					      IRQF_ONESHOT, "ths", tmdev, NULL);
 	if (ret)
 		return ret;
 
-- 
2.39.0


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

[PATCH v5 04/22] thermal/drivers/broadcom: convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe()

[Yangtao Li]

There are more than 700 calls to devm_request_threaded_irq method and
more than 1000 calls to devm_request_irq method. Most drivers only
request one interrupt resource, and these error messages are basically
the same. If error messages are printed everywhere, more than 2000 lines
of code can be saved by removing the msg in the driver.

And tglx point out that:

  If we actually look at the call sites of
  devm_request_threaded_irq() then the vast majority of them print more or
  less lousy error messages. A quick grep/sed/awk/sort/uniq revealed

     519 messages total (there are probably more)

     352 unique messages

     323 unique messages after lower casing

         Those 323 are mostly just variants of the same patterns with
         slight modifications in formatting and information provided.

     186 of these messages do not deliver any useful information,
         e.g. "no irq", "

     The most useful one of all is: "could request wakeup irq: %d"

  So there is certainly an argument to be made that this particular
  function should print a well formatted and informative error message.

  It's not a general allocator like kmalloc(). It's specialized and in the
  vast majority of cases failing to request the interrupt causes the
  device probe to fail. So having proper and consistent information why
  the device cannot be used _is_ useful.

So convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe() API, which ensure that all
error handling branches print error information.

In this way, when this function fails, the upper-layer functions can
directly return an error code without missing debugging information.
Otherwise, the error message will be printed redundantly or missing.

Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
Cc: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno  <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
Signed-off-by: Yangtao Li <frank.li@vivo.com>
---
 drivers/thermal/broadcom/brcmstb_thermal.c | 12 +++++-------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/thermal/broadcom/brcmstb_thermal.c b/drivers/thermal/broadcom/brcmstb_thermal.c
index 72d1dbe60b8f..ea37e7ee688a 100644
--- a/drivers/thermal/broadcom/brcmstb_thermal.c
+++ b/drivers/thermal/broadcom/brcmstb_thermal.c
@@ -349,14 +349,12 @@ static int brcmstb_thermal_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 
 	irq = platform_get_irq_optional(pdev, 0);
 	if (irq >= 0) {
-		ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&pdev->dev, irq, NULL,
-						brcmstb_tmon_irq_thread,
-						IRQF_ONESHOT,
-						DRV_NAME, priv);
-		if (ret < 0) {
-			dev_err(&pdev->dev, "could not request IRQ: %d\n", ret);
+		ret = devm_request_threaded_irq_probe(&pdev->dev, irq, NULL,
+						      brcmstb_tmon_irq_thread,
+						      IRQF_ONESHOT,
+						      DRV_NAME, priv, NULL);
+		if (ret < 0)
 			return ret;
-		}
 	}
 
 	dev_info(&pdev->dev, "registered AVS TMON of-sensor driver\n");
-- 
2.39.0


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

[PATCH v5 11/22] thermal/drivers/exynos: convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe()

[Yangtao Li]

There are more than 700 calls to devm_request_threaded_irq method and
more than 1000 calls to devm_request_irq method. Most drivers only
request one interrupt resource, and these error messages are basically
the same. If error messages are printed everywhere, more than 2000 lines
of code can be saved by removing the msg in the driver.

And tglx point out that:

  If we actually look at the call sites of
  devm_request_threaded_irq() then the vast majority of them print more or
  less lousy error messages. A quick grep/sed/awk/sort/uniq revealed

     519 messages total (there are probably more)

     352 unique messages

     323 unique messages after lower casing

         Those 323 are mostly just variants of the same patterns with
         slight modifications in formatting and information provided.

     186 of these messages do not deliver any useful information,
         e.g. "no irq", "

     The most useful one of all is: "could request wakeup irq: %d"

  So there is certainly an argument to be made that this particular
  function should print a well formatted and informative error message.

  It's not a general allocator like kmalloc(). It's specialized and in the
  vast majority of cases failing to request the interrupt causes the
  device probe to fail. So having proper and consistent information why
  the device cannot be used _is_ useful.

So convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe() API, which ensure that all
error handling branches print error information.

In this way, when this function fails, the upper-layer functions can
directly return an error code without missing debugging information.
Otherwise, the error message will be printed redundantly or missing.

Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
Cc: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno  <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
Signed-off-by: Yangtao Li <frank.li@vivo.com>
Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
---
 drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c | 9 ++++-----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c b/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c
index 45e5c840d130..697d2fbdb1bf 100644
--- a/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c
+++ b/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c
@@ -1100,12 +1100,11 @@ static int exynos_tmu_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 		goto err_sclk;
 	}
 
-	ret = devm_request_irq(&pdev->dev, data->irq, exynos_tmu_irq,
-		IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | IRQF_SHARED, dev_name(&pdev->dev), data);
-	if (ret) {
-		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to request irq: %d\n", data->irq);
+	ret = devm_request_irq_probe(&pdev->dev, data->irq, exynos_tmu_irq,
+				     IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | IRQF_SHARED,
+				     dev_name(&pdev->dev), data, NULL);
+	if (ret)
 		goto err_sclk;
-	}
 
 	exynos_tmu_control(pdev, true);
 	return 0;
-- 
2.39.0


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

[PATCH v5 13/22] thermal/drivers/rockchip: convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe()

[Yangtao Li]

There are more than 700 calls to devm_request_threaded_irq method and
more than 1000 calls to devm_request_irq method. Most drivers only
request one interrupt resource, and these error messages are basically
the same. If error messages are printed everywhere, more than 2000 lines
of code can be saved by removing the msg in the driver.

And tglx point out that:

  If we actually look at the call sites of
  devm_request_threaded_irq() then the vast majority of them print more or
  less lousy error messages. A quick grep/sed/awk/sort/uniq revealed

     519 messages total (there are probably more)

     352 unique messages

     323 unique messages after lower casing

         Those 323 are mostly just variants of the same patterns with
         slight modifications in formatting and information provided.

     186 of these messages do not deliver any useful information,
         e.g. "no irq", "

     The most useful one of all is: "could request wakeup irq: %d"

  So there is certainly an argument to be made that this particular
  function should print a well formatted and informative error message.

  It's not a general allocator like kmalloc(). It's specialized and in the
  vast majority of cases failing to request the interrupt causes the
  device probe to fail. So having proper and consistent information why
  the device cannot be used _is_ useful.

So convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe() API, which ensure that all
error handling branches print error information.

In this way, when this function fails, the upper-layer functions can
directly return an error code without missing debugging information.
Otherwise, the error message will be printed redundantly or missing.

Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
Cc: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno  <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
Signed-off-by: Yangtao Li <frank.li@vivo.com>
Acked-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
---
 drivers/thermal/rockchip_thermal.c | 11 +++++------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/thermal/rockchip_thermal.c b/drivers/thermal/rockchip_thermal.c
index 77231a9d28ff..11061f6ef323 100644
--- a/drivers/thermal/rockchip_thermal.c
+++ b/drivers/thermal/rockchip_thermal.c
@@ -1577,13 +1577,12 @@ static int rockchip_thermal_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 				"failed to register sensor[%d].\n", i);
 	}
 
-	error = devm_request_threaded_irq(&pdev->dev, irq, NULL,
-					  &rockchip_thermal_alarm_irq_thread,
-					  IRQF_ONESHOT,
-					  "rockchip_thermal", thermal);
+	error = devm_request_threaded_irq_probe(&pdev->dev, irq, NULL,
+						&rockchip_thermal_alarm_irq_thread,
+						IRQF_ONESHOT,
+						"rockchip_thermal", thermal, "tsadc");
 	if (error)
-		return dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, error,
-				     "failed to request tsadc irq.\n");
+		return error;
 
 	thermal->chip->control(thermal->regs, true);
 
-- 
2.39.0


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

[PATCH v5 15/22] thermal/drivers/mediatek/lvts_thermal: convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe()

[Yangtao Li]

There are more than 700 calls to devm_request_threaded_irq method and
more than 1000 calls to devm_request_irq method. Most drivers only
request one interrupt resource, and these error messages are basically
the same. If error messages are printed everywhere, more than 2000 lines
of code can be saved by removing the msg in the driver.

And tglx point out that:

  If we actually look at the call sites of
  devm_request_threaded_irq() then the vast majority of them print more or
  less lousy error messages. A quick grep/sed/awk/sort/uniq revealed

     519 messages total (there are probably more)

     352 unique messages

     323 unique messages after lower casing

         Those 323 are mostly just variants of the same patterns with
         slight modifications in formatting and information provided.

     186 of these messages do not deliver any useful information,
         e.g. "no irq", "

     The most useful one of all is: "could request wakeup irq: %d"

  So there is certainly an argument to be made that this particular
  function should print a well formatted and informative error message.

  It's not a general allocator like kmalloc(). It's specialized and in the
  vast majority of cases failing to request the interrupt causes the
  device probe to fail. So having proper and consistent information why
  the device cannot be used _is_ useful.

So convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe() API, which ensure that all
error handling branches print error information.

In this way, when this function fails, the upper-layer functions can
directly return an error code without missing debugging information.
Otherwise, the error message will be printed redundantly or missing.

Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
Cc: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno  <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
Signed-off-by: Yangtao Li <frank.li@vivo.com>
Reviewed-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
---
 drivers/thermal/mediatek/lvts_thermal.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/thermal/mediatek/lvts_thermal.c b/drivers/thermal/mediatek/lvts_thermal.c
index b693fac2d677..1e12410820df 100644
--- a/drivers/thermal/mediatek/lvts_thermal.c
+++ b/drivers/thermal/mediatek/lvts_thermal.c
@@ -1148,10 +1148,10 @@ static int lvts_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	 * At this point the LVTS is initialized and enabled. We can
 	 * safely enable the interrupt.
 	 */
-	ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(dev, irq, NULL, lvts_irq_handler,
-					IRQF_ONESHOT, dev_name(dev), lvts_td);
+	ret = devm_request_threaded_irq_probe(dev, irq, NULL, lvts_irq_handler,
+					      IRQF_ONESHOT, dev_name(dev), lvts_td, NULL);
 	if (ret)
-		return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to request interrupt\n");
+		return ret;
 
 	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, lvts_td);
 
-- 
2.39.0


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

[PATCH v5 18/22] thermal/drivers/stm: convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe()

[Yangtao Li]

There are more than 700 calls to devm_request_threaded_irq method and
more than 1000 calls to devm_request_irq method. Most drivers only
request one interrupt resource, and these error messages are basically
the same. If error messages are printed everywhere, more than 2000 lines
of code can be saved by removing the msg in the driver.

And tglx point out that:

  If we actually look at the call sites of
  devm_request_threaded_irq() then the vast majority of them print more or
  less lousy error messages. A quick grep/sed/awk/sort/uniq revealed

     519 messages total (there are probably more)

     352 unique messages

     323 unique messages after lower casing

         Those 323 are mostly just variants of the same patterns with
         slight modifications in formatting and information provided.

     186 of these messages do not deliver any useful information,
         e.g. "no irq", "

     The most useful one of all is: "could request wakeup irq: %d"

  So there is certainly an argument to be made that this particular
  function should print a well formatted and informative error message.

  It's not a general allocator like kmalloc(). It's specialized and in the
  vast majority of cases failing to request the interrupt causes the
  device probe to fail. So having proper and consistent information why
  the device cannot be used _is_ useful.

So convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe() API, which ensure that all
error handling branches print error information.

In this way, when this function fails, the upper-layer functions can
directly return an error code without missing debugging information.
Otherwise, the error message will be printed redundantly or missing.

Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
Cc: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno  <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
Signed-off-by: Yangtao Li <frank.li@vivo.com>
---
 drivers/thermal/st/st_thermal_memmap.c | 12 +++++-------
 drivers/thermal/st/stm_thermal.c       | 13 ++++---------
 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/thermal/st/st_thermal_memmap.c b/drivers/thermal/st/st_thermal_memmap.c
index e8cfa83b724a..40bb318b5489 100644
--- a/drivers/thermal/st/st_thermal_memmap.c
+++ b/drivers/thermal/st/st_thermal_memmap.c
@@ -97,14 +97,12 @@ static int st_mmap_register_enable_irq(struct st_thermal_sensor *sensor)
 	if (sensor->irq < 0)
 		return sensor->irq;
 
-	ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(dev, sensor->irq,
-					NULL, st_mmap_thermal_trip_handler,
-					IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | IRQF_ONESHOT,
-					dev->driver->name, sensor);
-	if (ret) {
-		dev_err(dev, "failed to register IRQ %d\n", sensor->irq);
+	ret = devm_request_threaded_irq_probe(dev, sensor->irq,
+					      NULL, st_mmap_thermal_trip_handler,
+					      IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | IRQF_ONESHOT,
+					      dev->driver->name, sensor, NULL);
+	if (ret)
 		return ret;
-	}
 
 	return st_mmap_enable_irq(sensor);
 }
diff --git a/drivers/thermal/st/stm_thermal.c b/drivers/thermal/st/stm_thermal.c
index 903fcf1763f1..6a36a7eab9bd 100644
--- a/drivers/thermal/st/stm_thermal.c
+++ b/drivers/thermal/st/stm_thermal.c
@@ -387,16 +387,11 @@ static int stm_register_irq(struct stm_thermal_sensor *sensor)
 	if (sensor->irq < 0)
 		return sensor->irq;
 
-	ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(dev, sensor->irq,
-					NULL,
-					stm_thermal_irq_handler,
-					IRQF_ONESHOT,
-					dev->driver->name, sensor);
-	if (ret) {
-		dev_err(dev, "%s: Failed to register IRQ %d\n", __func__,
-			sensor->irq);
+	ret = devm_request_threaded_irq_probe(dev, sensor->irq, NULL,
+					      stm_thermal_irq_handler, IRQF_ONESHOT,
+					      dev->driver->name, sensor, NULL);
+	if (ret)
 		return ret;
-	}
 
 	dev_dbg(dev, "%s: thermal IRQ registered", __func__);
 
-- 
2.39.0


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

[PATCH v5 21/22] thermal/drivers/uniphier: convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe()

[Yangtao Li]

There are more than 700 calls to devm_request_threaded_irq method and
more than 1000 calls to devm_request_irq method. Most drivers only
request one interrupt resource, and these error messages are basically
the same. If error messages are printed everywhere, more than 2000 lines
of code can be saved by removing the msg in the driver.

And tglx point out that:

  If we actually look at the call sites of
  devm_request_threaded_irq() then the vast majority of them print more or
  less lousy error messages. A quick grep/sed/awk/sort/uniq revealed

     519 messages total (there are probably more)

     352 unique messages

     323 unique messages after lower casing

         Those 323 are mostly just variants of the same patterns with
         slight modifications in formatting and information provided.

     186 of these messages do not deliver any useful information,
         e.g. "no irq", "

     The most useful one of all is: "could request wakeup irq: %d"

  So there is certainly an argument to be made that this particular
  function should print a well formatted and informative error message.

  It's not a general allocator like kmalloc(). It's specialized and in the
  vast majority of cases failing to request the interrupt causes the
  device probe to fail. So having proper and consistent information why
  the device cannot be used _is_ useful.

So convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe() API, which ensure that all
error handling branches print error information.

In this way, when this function fails, the upper-layer functions can
directly return an error code without missing debugging information.
Otherwise, the error message will be printed redundantly or missing.

Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
Cc: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno  <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
Signed-off-by: Yangtao Li <frank.li@vivo.com>
---
 drivers/thermal/uniphier_thermal.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/thermal/uniphier_thermal.c b/drivers/thermal/uniphier_thermal.c
index aef6119cc004..34d8eb2138d3 100644
--- a/drivers/thermal/uniphier_thermal.c
+++ b/drivers/thermal/uniphier_thermal.c
@@ -278,9 +278,9 @@ static int uniphier_tm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 		return ret;
 	}
 
-	ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(dev, irq, uniphier_tm_alarm_irq,
-					uniphier_tm_alarm_irq_thread,
-					0, "thermal", tdev);
+	ret = devm_request_threaded_irq_probe(dev, irq, uniphier_tm_alarm_irq,
+					      uniphier_tm_alarm_irq_thread,
+					      0, "thermal", tdev, NULL);
 	if (ret)
 		return ret;
 
-- 
2.39.0


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

[PATCH v5 22/22] thermal/drivers/imx: convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe()

[Yangtao Li]

There are more than 700 calls to devm_request_threaded_irq method and
more than 1000 calls to devm_request_irq method. Most drivers only
request one interrupt resource, and these error messages are basically
the same. If error messages are printed everywhere, more than 2000 lines
of code can be saved by removing the msg in the driver.

And tglx point out that:

  If we actually look at the call sites of
  devm_request_threaded_irq() then the vast majority of them print more or
  less lousy error messages. A quick grep/sed/awk/sort/uniq revealed

     519 messages total (there are probably more)

     352 unique messages

     323 unique messages after lower casing

         Those 323 are mostly just variants of the same patterns with
         slight modifications in formatting and information provided.

     186 of these messages do not deliver any useful information,
         e.g. "no irq", "

     The most useful one of all is: "could request wakeup irq: %d"

  So there is certainly an argument to be made that this particular
  function should print a well formatted and informative error message.

  It's not a general allocator like kmalloc(). It's specialized and in the
  vast majority of cases failing to request the interrupt causes the
  device probe to fail. So having proper and consistent information why
  the device cannot be used _is_ useful.

So convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe() API, which ensure that all
error handling branches print error information.

In this way, when this function fails, the upper-layer functions can
directly return an error code without missing debugging information.
Otherwise, the error message will be printed redundantly or missing.

Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
Cc: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno  <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
Signed-off-by: Yangtao Li <frank.li@vivo.com>
---
 drivers/thermal/imx_thermal.c | 11 +++++------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/thermal/imx_thermal.c b/drivers/thermal/imx_thermal.c
index a94ec0a0c9dd..3131a09f9906 100644
--- a/drivers/thermal/imx_thermal.c
+++ b/drivers/thermal/imx_thermal.c
@@ -746,13 +746,12 @@ static int imx_thermal_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	if (ret)
 		goto thermal_zone_unregister;
 
-	ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&pdev->dev, data->irq,
-			imx_thermal_alarm_irq, imx_thermal_alarm_irq_thread,
-			0, "imx_thermal", data);
-	if (ret < 0) {
-		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to request alarm irq: %d\n", ret);
+	ret = devm_request_threaded_irq_probe(&pdev->dev, data->irq,
+					      imx_thermal_alarm_irq,
+					      imx_thermal_alarm_irq_thread,
+					      0, "imx_thermal", data, "alarm");
+	if (ret < 0)
 		goto thermal_zone_unregister;
-	}
 
 	pm_runtime_put(data->dev);
 
-- 
2.39.0


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v5 02/22] thermal/drivers/sun8i: convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe()

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 11:47 AM Yangtao Li <frank.li@vivo.com> wrote:
>
> There are more than 700 calls to devm_request_threaded_irq method and
> more than 1000 calls to devm_request_irq method. Most drivers only
> request one interrupt resource, and these error messages are basically
> the same. If error messages are printed everywhere, more than 2000 lines
> of code can be saved by removing the msg in the driver.
>
> And tglx point out that:
>
>   If we actually look at the call sites of
>   devm_request_threaded_irq() then the vast majority of them print more or
>   less lousy error messages. A quick grep/sed/awk/sort/uniq revealed
>
>      519 messages total (there are probably more)
>
>      352 unique messages
>
>      323 unique messages after lower casing
>
>          Those 323 are mostly just variants of the same patterns with
>          slight modifications in formatting and information provided.
>
>      186 of these messages do not deliver any useful information,
>          e.g. "no irq", "
>
>      The most useful one of all is: "could request wakeup irq: %d"
>
>   So there is certainly an argument to be made that this particular
>   function should print a well formatted and informative error message.
>
>   It's not a general allocator like kmalloc(). It's specialized and in the
>   vast majority of cases failing to request the interrupt causes the
>   device probe to fail. So having proper and consistent information why
>   the device cannot be used _is_ useful.
>
> So convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe() API, which ensure that all
> error handling branches print error information.
>
> In this way, when this function fails, the upper-layer functions can
> directly return an error code without missing debugging information.
> Otherwise, the error message will be printed redundantly or missing.
>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
> Cc: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
> Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
> Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno  <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yangtao Li <frank.li@vivo.com>
> Acked-by: Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>

It is not clear to me what the purpose of sending these patches is.

Because the devm_request_threaded_irq_probe() definition is not there
in the current -rc kernels AFAICS, it looks like they are sent in
order to collect tags from people.  If so, there should be a cover
letter making that clear.

As it stands, it is also unclear how you want them to be merged.

Moreover, sending the series without patch [01/22] to linux-pm has not
been helpful.

Thanks!

> ---
>  drivers/thermal/sun8i_thermal.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/sun8i_thermal.c b/drivers/thermal/sun8i_thermal.c
> index 195f3c5d0b38..a952804ff993 100644
> --- a/drivers/thermal/sun8i_thermal.c
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/sun8i_thermal.c
> @@ -512,9 +512,9 @@ static int sun8i_ths_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>          * registered yet, we deffer the registration of the interrupt to
>          * the end.
>          */
> -       ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(dev, irq, NULL,
> -                                       sun8i_irq_thread,
> -                                       IRQF_ONESHOT, "ths", tmdev);
> +       ret = devm_request_threaded_irq_probe(dev, irq, NULL,
> +                                             sun8i_irq_thread,
> +                                             IRQF_ONESHOT, "ths", tmdev, NULL);
>         if (ret)
>                 return ret;
>
> --
> 2.39.0
>

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

答复: [PATCH v5 02/22] thermal/drivers/sun8i: convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe()

[李扬韬]

Hi Rafael,

> It is not clear to me what the purpose of sending these patches is.
> 
> Because the devm_request_threaded_irq_probe() definition is not there
> in the current -rc kernels AFAICS, it looks like they are sent in
> order to collect tags from people.  If so, there should be a cover
> letter making that clear.
> 
> As it stands, it is also unclear how you want them to be merged.
> 
> Moreover, sending the series without patch [01/22] to linux-pm has not
> been helpful.

Could you please merge the entire series into the pm branch? 
Also, do I need to send a new version?

MBR,
Yangtao

Re: [PATCH v5 02/22] thermal/drivers/sun8i: convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe()

[Yangtao Li]

Hi Rafael,

> It is not clear to me what the purpose of sending these patches is.
> 
> Because the devm_request_threaded_irq_probe() definition is not there 
> in the current -rc kernels AFAICS, it looks like they are sent in 
> order to collect tags from people.  If so, there should be a cover 
> letter making that clear.
> 
> As it stands, it is also unclear how you want them to be merged.
> 
> Moreover, sending the series without patch [01/22] to linux-pm has not 
> been helpful.

Could you please merge the entire series into the pm branch? 
Also, do I need to send a new version?

MBR,
Yangtao

Re: [PATCH v5 02/22] thermal/drivers/sun8i: convert to use devm_request*_irq_probe()

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Wed, Aug 28 2024 at 21:21, Yangtao Li wrote:
>> It is not clear to me what the purpose of sending these patches is.
>> 
>> Because the devm_request_threaded_irq_probe() definition is not there 
>> in the current -rc kernels AFAICS, it looks like they are sent in 
>> order to collect tags from people.  If so, there should be a cover 
>> letter making that clear.
>> 
>> As it stands, it is also unclear how you want them to be merged.
>> 
>> Moreover, sending the series without patch [01/22] to linux-pm has not 
>> been helpful.
>
> Could you please merge the entire series into the pm branch? 
> Also, do I need to send a new version?

There are review comments in this thread which you have to address, no?

Thanks,

        tglx