From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client did not present a certificate)
	by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBB68DDDDB
	for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Tue, 22 Jan 2008 10:07:33 +1100 (EST)
Subject: Re: [i2c] [PATCH 19 3/5] Clean up error returns
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
In-Reply-To: <20080121171025.524dc465@hyperion.delvare>
References: <20080112024737.7023.61680.stgit@terra.home>
	<20080112024743.7023.23630.stgit@terra.home>
	<20080120120730.06dd8a7f@hyperion.delvare>
	<9e4733910801200718q7304bc29q38e67580613189e4@mail.gmail.com>
	<9e4733910801200739x502d5407x85f0d950ace80bee@mail.gmail.com>
	<20080121171025.524dc465@hyperion.delvare>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 10:04:44 +1100
Message-Id: <1200956684.6807.14.camel@pasglop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, i2c@lm-sensors.org
Reply-To: benh@kernel.crashing.org
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>


On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 17:10 +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Jon,
> 
> On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 10:39:43 -0500, Jon Smirl wrote:
> > Here' s a version with the compares to zero switched to NO_IRQ. If I
> > understand how NO_IRQ works it is the correct change. My understanding
> > is that under ppc IRQ zero was legal and NO_IRQ was -1. But then the
> > whole kernel switched to NO_IRQ = zero. Powerpc updated to NO_IRQ=0
> > and used virtual IRQs to move a physical IRQ 0 to another IRQ number.
> > ppc was not changed. This driver does not appear to have been updated
> > to track this global change since it didn't initially use the NO_IRQ
> > define everywhere.
> 
> As I have already applied the part of this patch that preserves error
> values in error paths, can you please send an incremental patch that
> only fixes the IRQ issues? These are separate issues so it's better to
> have separate patches anyway.

To be clear, nowadays, checking against 0 is correct unless you intend
the driver to work with arch/ppc (which we'll deprecate soon).

Ben.