From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
Cc: Frederik Deweerdt <deweerdt@free.fr>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"J.A. Magall??n" <jamagallon@ono.com>,
"Linux-Kernel," <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [-mm patch] aic7xxx: check irq validity (was Re: 2.6.18-mm2)
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2006 08:28:07 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061001142807.GD16272@parisc-linux.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <451F049A.1010404@garzik.org>
On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 07:58:18PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Actually, rather than adding this check to every driver, I would rather
> do something like the attached patch: create a pci_request_irq(), and
> pass a struct pci_device to it. Then the driver author doesn't have to
> worry about such details.
I like pci_request_irq(), but pci_valid_irq is bad.
> +#ifndef ARCH_VALIDATE_PCI_IRQ
> +int pci_valid_irq(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> +{
> + if (pdev->irq == 0)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(pci_valid_irq);
> +#endif /* ARCH_VALIDATE_PCI_IRQ */
Better would be:
#ifndef ARCH_VALIDATE_IRQ
static inline int valid_irq(unsigned int irq)
{
return irq ? 1 : 0;
}
#endif
in linux/interrupt.h (around request_irq).
And it doesn't need to be a __must_check. There's no point -- it has
no side-effects. The only reason to call it is if you want the answer
to the question. You had the sense of the return code wrong too; you
want to use it as:
int pci_request_irq(struct pci_dev *pdev, irq_handler_t handler,
unsigned long flags, const char *name, void *data)
{
if (!valid_irq(pdev->irq)) {
dev_printk(KERN_ERR, &pdev->dev, "invalid irq\n");
return -EINVAL;
}
return request_irq(pdev->irq, handler, flags | IRQF_SHARED, name, data);
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-01 14:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20060928014623.ccc9b885.akpm@osdl.org>
2006-09-29 13:57 ` 2.6.18-mm2 J.A. Magallón
2006-09-29 14:39 ` 2.6.18-mm2 Matthew Wilcox
2006-09-29 17:15 ` 2.6.18-mm2 Alan Cox
2006-09-29 23:50 ` 2.6.18-mm2 Frederik Deweerdt
2006-09-29 23:43 ` 2.6.18-mm2 Alan Cox
2006-09-30 14:09 ` [-mm patch] aic7xxx: check irq validity (was Re: 2.6.18-mm2) Frederik Deweerdt
2006-09-30 14:19 ` Alan Cox
2006-09-30 13:51 ` Willy Tarreau
2006-09-30 23:58 ` Jeff Garzik
2006-10-01 14:28 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2006-10-01 19:05 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-10-01 19:19 ` Jeff Garzik
2006-10-01 19:34 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-10-01 19:36 ` Matthew Wilcox
2006-10-01 19:42 ` Jeff Garzik
2006-10-02 2:12 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-10-02 20:00 ` [RFC PATCH] pci_request_irq (was [-mm patch] aic7xxx: check irq validity) Frederik Deweerdt
2006-10-02 18:15 ` Matthew Wilcox
2006-10-02 21:09 ` Frederik Deweerdt
2006-10-02 20:07 ` [RFC PATCH] move aic7xxx to pci_request_irq Frederik Deweerdt
2006-10-02 18:27 ` Matthew Wilcox
2006-10-02 21:02 ` Frederik Deweerdt
2006-10-03 3:45 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-10-02 20:11 ` [RFC PATCH] move tg3 " Frederik Deweerdt
2006-10-02 18:28 ` Matthew Wilcox
2006-10-02 21:04 ` Frederik Deweerdt
2006-10-03 7:18 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-10-02 20:12 ` [RFC PATCH] move drm " Frederik Deweerdt
2006-10-02 18:37 ` Matthew Wilcox
2006-10-02 21:07 ` Frederik Deweerdt
2006-10-02 20:36 ` Alan Cox
2006-10-02 22:26 ` Frederik Deweerdt
2006-10-02 23:54 ` Dave Airlie
2006-10-03 7:17 ` Frederik Deweerdt
2006-10-03 3:58 ` [RFC PATCH] pci_request_irq (was [-mm patch] aic7xxx: check irq validity) Randy Dunlap
2006-10-01 21:31 ` [-mm patch] aic7xxx: check irq validity (was Re: 2.6.18-mm2) Frederik Deweerdt
2006-09-30 15:26 ` 2.6.18-mm2 James Bottomley
2006-09-30 16:21 ` 2.6.18-mm2 Matthew Wilcox
2006-09-30 17:20 ` 2.6.18-mm2 Mark Rustad
2006-09-30 20:54 ` 2.6.18-mm2 Alan Cox
2006-09-29 23:15 ` 2.6.18-mm2 J.A. Magallón
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20061001142807.GD16272@parisc-linux.org \
--to=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=deweerdt@free.fr \
--cc=jamagallon@ono.com \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox