Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] iio: Remove redundant error messages on IRQ request failure

[Pan Chuang]

On 2026/7/27 4:24, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:59:41 +0100
> Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 24 Jul 2026 12:27:01 +0200
>> Joshua Crofts <joshua.crofts1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 24 Jul 2026 11:03:35 +0800
>>> Pan Chuang <panchuang@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>   
>>>> Commit 55b48e23f5c4 ("genirq/devres: Add error handling in devm_request_*_irq()")
>>>> added automatic error logging to devm_request_threaded_irq() and
>>>> devm_request_any_context_irq() via the new devm_request_result() helper,
>>>> which prints device name, IRQ number, handler functions, and error code
>>>> on failure.
>>>>
>>>> Since devm_request_irq() is a static inline wrapper around
>>>> devm_request_threaded_irq(), it also benefits from this
>>>> automatic logging.
>>>>
>>>> Remove the now-redundant dev_err() and dev_err_probe() calls
>>>> in iio drivers that follow these devm_request_*_irq()
>>>> functions, as the core now provides more detailed diagnostic
>>>> information on failure.
>>>>
>>>> v2:
>>>> - Rewrap commit description to one line.
>>>> - Drop redundant "!= 0" and "< 0" comparisons.
>>>>     
>>>
>>> Okay, code-wise it's fine, but rewrap your commit messages to 72
>>> characters per line.   
>>
>> That would involve breaking the commit reference across lines.
>> I asked that the author not do that on the previous version because
>> it'll make it harder to search for if anyone ever wants to do so.
>>
>> Also submitting patches suggests 75 chars. I'm not sure where the 72
>> comes from, though it is often quoted and another bit of submitting
>> patches does say 70 to 75.
>>
>
> Picked up series with a few tweaks to call out where if (ret < 0)
> changes occurred and making sure Andy's RB actually got added.
> There was enough changing in here that b4's fuzzy matching missed
> sometimes.
>
> Pan, please be careful to pick up given tags on future patch sets.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jonathan
>
Thank you for the work on this series. Apologies for the oversight
regarding the tags. I will ensure given tags are correctly picked up
in future patch sets.

Best Regards,

PanChuang
>
>>
>>
>>> Feel free to apply my tag for the whole series:
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Joshua Crofts <joshua.crofts1@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> Also, I was scratching my head at how enormous the To: list is, given
>>> these changes are only in IIO, but I assume you also added emails of
>>> the people who authored the latest changes on a file that get_maintainer
>>> outputs - there is no need to do this. Tools like b4 can automatically
>>> add (correct) recipients based on get_maintainer.pl
>>>   
>>
>>
>