Re: [PATCH] tty: serial: imx: Only get second/third IRQ when there is more than one IRQ

[Uwe Kleine-König]

On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 07:24:57AM +0000, Anson Huang wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 06:58:24AM +0000, Anson Huang wrote:
> > > > The patch is fine given the changed behaviour of platform_get_irq. I
> > > > wonder if it is sensible to introduce a variant of platform_get_irq (say
> > > > platform_get_irq_nowarn) that behaves like __platform_get_irq does t
> > > > Then the imx driver would just call platform_get_irq_nowarn without
> > > > having to check the number of available irqs first.
> > >
> > > Agreed, it would be nice if we can fix this from the API level, this
> > > is to save many patches from various drivers side, let me know if
> > > agreement is reached and I will do the patch.
> > 
> > I wouldn't expect that most callers actually want an error message and so
> > these need a different patch (i.e. dropping the error message by the caller).
> > This type of patch is fine and the normal load when something is
> > consolidated.
> > 
> > Which other drivers do you have on your radar that don't want an error
> > message if platform_get_irq() fails?
> 
> I did NOT mean drivers don't want an error when getting irq failed, but I just
> agree that introducing another API with nowarn as you mentioned upper, then
> i.MX driver can call it. For now, the FEC driver also have many such error message,
> we will fix later.
> 
> So if the API with nowarn is added, then I can change the API call in some i.MX driver
> instead of getting irq_count first. Do you think I should add the nowarn API and redo
> this patch to call it? 

Having a patch (or a set of patches) is probably helpful to get forward
here, yes. You have my blessing to create a suggestion. (Not that you
actually need that :-)

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |