| Message ID | 20220510164123.557921-1-antonio.borneo@foss.st.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [1/7] irqchip/stm32-exti: set_affinity return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE if no parent | expand |
Antonio, On Tue, 10 May 2022 17:41:17 +0100, Antonio Borneo <antonio.borneo@foss.st.com> wrote: > > From: Ludovic Barre <ludovic.barre@foss.st.com> > > If no parent, there is no specific action to do in > stm32 irqchip, and so return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE. > > Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre <ludovic.barre@foss.st.com> > Signed-off-by: Antonio Borneo <antonio.borneo@foss.st.com> > --- > drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c > index 9d18f47040eb..10c9c742c216 100644 > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c > @@ -614,7 +614,7 @@ static int stm32_exti_h_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d, > if (d->parent_data->chip) > return irq_chip_set_affinity_parent(d, dest, force); > > - return -EINVAL; > + return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE; > } > > static int __maybe_unused stm32_exti_h_suspend(void) <rant> Can you *please* use a cover-letter when sending more that a single patch? I expect there is an overarching motive to this series. Where is it described? Also, please look at the way the subject lines are written for most irqchip patches: irqchip/foo: Frobify the bar callback return value Note the capital letter after the ':', and the fact that it starts with a verb. Here, I would have liked to see: irqchip/stm32-exti: Fix set_affinity() return value and leave the meat of the description to the commit log (instead of saying the exact same thing twice). </rant> Thanks, M.
Hi Marc, On Tue, 2022-05-10 at 19:34 +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > Antonio, > > On Tue, 10 May 2022 17:41:17 +0100, > Antonio Borneo <antonio.borneo@foss.st.com> wrote: > > > > From: Ludovic Barre <ludovic.barre@foss.st.com> > > > > If no parent, there is no specific action to do in > > stm32 irqchip, and so return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre <ludovic.barre@foss.st.com> > > Signed-off-by: Antonio Borneo <antonio.borneo@foss.st.com> > > --- > > drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c > > b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c > > index 9d18f47040eb..10c9c742c216 100644 > > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c > > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c > > @@ -614,7 +614,7 @@ static int stm32_exti_h_set_affinity(struct > > irq_data *d, > > if (d->parent_data->chip) > > return irq_chip_set_affinity_parent(d, dest, > > force); > > > > - return -EINVAL; > > + return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE; > > } > > > > static int __maybe_unused stm32_exti_h_suspend(void) > > <rant> > Can you *please* use a cover-letter when sending more that a single > patch? I expect there is an overarching motive to this series. Where > is it described? > > Also, please look at the way the subject lines are written for most > irqchip patches: > > irqchip/foo: Frobify the bar callback return value > > Note the capital letter after the ':', and the fact that it starts > with a verb. Here, I would have liked to see: > > irqchip/stm32-exti: Fix set_affinity() return value > > and leave the meat of the description to the commit log (instead of > saying the exact same thing twice). > </rant> thanks for your review and the hints on this series. I will shortly send a V2. Regards, Antonio
On Wed, 11 May 2022 07:39:43 +0100, Antonio Borneo <antonio.borneo@foss.st.com> wrote: > > Hi Marc, > > On Tue, 2022-05-10 at 19:34 +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > Antonio, > > > > On Tue, 10 May 2022 17:41:17 +0100, > > Antonio Borneo <antonio.borneo@foss.st.com> wrote: > > > > > > From: Ludovic Barre <ludovic.barre@foss.st.com> > > > > > > If no parent, there is no specific action to do in > > > stm32 irqchip, and so return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre <ludovic.barre@foss.st.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Antonio Borneo <antonio.borneo@foss.st.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c > > > b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c > > > index 9d18f47040eb..10c9c742c216 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c > > > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c > > > @@ -614,7 +614,7 @@ static int stm32_exti_h_set_affinity(struct > > > irq_data *d, > > > if (d->parent_data->chip) > > > return irq_chip_set_affinity_parent(d, dest, > > > force); > > > > > > - return -EINVAL; > > > + return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE; > > > } > > > > > > static int __maybe_unused stm32_exti_h_suspend(void) > > > > <rant> > > Can you *please* use a cover-letter when sending more that a single > > patch? I expect there is an overarching motive to this series. Where > > is it described? > > > > Also, please look at the way the subject lines are written for most > > irqchip patches: > > > > irqchip/foo: Frobify the bar callback return value > > > > Note the capital letter after the ':', and the fact that it starts > > with a verb. Here, I would have liked to see: > > > > irqchip/stm32-exti: Fix set_affinity() return value > > > > and leave the meat of the description to the commit log (instead of > > saying the exact same thing twice). > > </rant> > > thanks for your review and the hints on this series. > I will shortly send a V2. No rush. I'm about to close the 5.19 irqchip tree. Thanks, M.
diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c index 9d18f47040eb..10c9c742c216 100644 --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c @@ -614,7 +614,7 @@ static int stm32_exti_h_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d, if (d->parent_data->chip) return irq_chip_set_affinity_parent(d, dest, force); - return -EINVAL; + return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE; } static int __maybe_unused stm32_exti_h_suspend(void)