From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] MFD: Palmas: Check if interrupts property exists and then only request irq Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 09:51:39 -0600 Message-ID: <51C0820B.4020404@wwwdotorg.org> References: <1371549692-7361-1-git-send-email-j-keerthy@ti.com> <1371549692-7361-2-git-send-email-j-keerthy@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1371549692-7361-2-git-send-email-j-keerthy@ti.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: J Keerthy Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, broonie@kernel.org, ldewangan@nvidia.com, sameo@linux.intel.com, grant.likely@secretlab.ca, swarren@nvidia.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, gg@slimlogic.co.uk List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On 06/18/2013 04:01 AM, J Keerthy wrote: > Check if interrupts property exists and then only request irq. > On some boards INT line might not be connected to a valid > irq line on the application processor. Hence keeping a check > before requesting irq. When there is no interrupts property, surely i2c->irq == 0, which is an invalid IRQ, and hence there's no need to check this before copying the value? In other words, I think this whole patch could just be: + palmas->irq = i2c->irq; right?