From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 22CE43806A6; Tue, 24 Feb 2026 14:47:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.20 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771944461; cv=none; b=fPDcT60n6wxaYBJqz1PTh+38cDGhndoRarmnc1b+3ewQQ5zlW284kZUWxEVA86zVM59tg97Ia794tAlBkBapAIbMXk219AAXU49Mml/XhkPDFoGa+ihHft/BDNRw5IbQgtg9s4hwFBFEAn2GxAwuaqAkl90fvh6/ZU1nzwmWtCQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771944461; c=relaxed/simple; bh=HNwIPreUxtPY9hJGBPCv+k4DTs5pbdiRTxC/peYEQuY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=iGzgUWieeeCSaoD/u+X4hy3gcfssvXh+J65t67BkwWlj648nGgPVSQyCIVhIzOSKPb5uY3p6UwGfHcQ/WjN8+01CsGWkPHbTm8rekqnLIOv6iRdz4UnEh5s4rggCfOrLHKEVJZuTcafw6HD8XcQAY0WfE3pgAXGBv7K3xM8HGF8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=LwGRyn7a; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.20 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="LwGRyn7a" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1771944460; x=1803480460; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=HNwIPreUxtPY9hJGBPCv+k4DTs5pbdiRTxC/peYEQuY=; b=LwGRyn7aHmVT+2gPKcpLwMAzDDFtgLn0w8KklWzX6CW9olFEAsl73VuP 12hDJeMQZVbqNxwtCPvApIohWkhjU1IfJbG+SvB85F6xev8PKxyTGG0h5 WzAVtbGHkuXZ7oVEDN8xDdu5Cl89MQ/99z4ApIy8UpOJT3XxSq5qTYAn8 TT2PiNLIkJWij/uXSwjL4x3KE1PE/kfXl7haFk5P41ahNzq23roKxqOga pfiF6GPEMnZSG9TlyFwWY0DXepcRCRcJP+6nZVtLWR3+q20vS7ZkGxg8S jEc+7liVgJmbvSjdSKfwk+dGmGquiBVFu8MFFuCcObYM0Lks69dhZSuy+ w==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: bGKig5ZeQvOWK6WuKFHlUw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: hBg+wHlaSaSiMySJrehbiw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11711"; a="72661759" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.21,308,1763452800"; d="scan'208";a="72661759" Received: from orviesa010.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.150]) by orvoesa112.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 24 Feb 2026 06:47:40 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: WSPsJHVARre17Ipcu4eZTw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: jcNlNRtkSHe1/3KJkN9umg== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.21,308,1763452800"; d="scan'208";a="215160658" Received: from egrumbac-mobl6.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.244.146]) by orviesa010-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 24 Feb 2026 06:47:36 -0800 Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2026 16:47:34 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Giorgi Tchankvetadze Cc: Antoniu.Miclaus@analog.com, Nuno.Sa@analog.com, lars@metafoo.de, Michael.Hennerich@analog.com, jic23@kernel.org, dlechner@baylibre.com, andy@kernel.org, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: ade9000: fix wrong return type in streaming push Message-ID: References: <20260224125921.70946-2-giorgitchankvetadze1997@gmail.com> <20260224132354.76672-2-giorgitchankvetadze1997@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260224132354.76672-2-giorgitchankvetadze1997@gmail.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - c/o Alberga Business Park, 6 krs, Bertel Jungin Aukio 5, 02600 Espoo On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 05:23:55PM +0400, Giorgi Tchankvetadze wrote: > The else branch of ade9000_iio_push_streaming() incorrectly returns > IRQ_HANDLED on regmap_write failure. This function returns int (0 on > success, negative errno on failure), so IRQ_HANDLED (1) would be > misinterpreted as a non-error by callers. > > Return ret instead, consistent with every other error path in the > function. Again, do NOT start a _new_ version in the _previous_ version email thread. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko