[PATCH] of: property: fw_devlink: Ignore interrupts property for some configs

When CONFIG_OF_IRQ is not defined, it doesn't make sense to parse
interrupts property.

Also, parsing and tracking interrupts property breaks some PPC
devices[1].  But none of the IRQ drivers in PPC seem ready to be
converted to a proper platform (or any bus) driver. So, there's not much
of a point in tracking the interrupts property for CONFIG_PPC. So, let's
stop parsing interrupts for CONFIG_PPC.

[1] - https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210213185422.GA195733@roeck-us.net/
Fixes: 4104ca776ba3 ("of: property: Add fw_devlink support for interrupts")
Reported-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <redacted>
---
Greg/Rob,

I believe this needs to land on driver-core-next.

-Saravana

 drivers/of/property.c | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/of/property.c b/drivers/of/property.c
index 79b68519fe30..5036a362f52e 100644
--- a/drivers/of/property.c
+++ b/drivers/of/property.c

@@ -1300,6 +1300,9 @@ static struct device_node *parse_interrupts(struct device_node *np,
 {
 	struct of_phandle_args sup_args;
 
+	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF_IRQ) || IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PPC))
+		return NULL;
+
 	if (strcmp(prop_name, "interrupts") &&
 	    strcmp(prop_name, "interrupts-extended"))
 		return NULL;

-- 
2.30.0.478.g8a0d178c01-goog

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 02:42:58PM -0800, Saravana Kannan wrote:

When CONFIG_OF_IRQ is not defined, it doesn't make sense to parse
interrupts property.

Also, parsing and tracking interrupts property breaks some PPC
devices[1].  But none of the IRQ drivers in PPC seem ready to be
converted to a proper platform (or any bus) driver. So, there's not much
of a point in tracking the interrupts property for CONFIG_PPC. So, let's
stop parsing interrupts for CONFIG_PPC.

[1] - https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210213185422.GA195733@roeck-us.net/
Fixes: 4104ca776ba3 ("of: property: Add fw_devlink support for interrupts")
Reported-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <redacted>

That does the trick, at least for my test cases.

Tested-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>

Guenter

On 15.02.21 23:42, Saravana Kannan wrote:

Hi,

wouldn't it be better to #ifdef-out the whole code in this case ?


--mtx


-- 
---
Hinweis: unverschlüsselte E-Mails können leicht abgehört und manipuliert
werden ! Für eine vertrauliche Kommunikation senden Sie bitte ihren
GPG/PGP-Schlüssel zu.
---
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287

On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 12:20 PM Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
[off-list ref] wrote:

On 15.02.21 23:42, Saravana Kannan wrote:

Hi,

quoted

diff --git a/drivers/of/property.c b/drivers/of/property.c
index 79b68519fe30..5036a362f52e 100644
--- a/drivers/of/property.c
+++ b/drivers/of/property.c

@@ -1300,6 +1300,9 @@ static struct device_node *parse_interrupts(struct device_node *np,
  {
      struct of_phandle_args sup_args;

+     if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF_IRQ) || IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PPC))
+             return NULL;
+
      if (strcmp(prop_name, "interrupts") &&
          strcmp(prop_name, "interrupts-extended"))
              return NULL;

wouldn't it be better to #ifdef-out the whole code in this case ?

No, #ifdef is not preferred. That's why we even have the IS_ENABLED()
macros in the first place. The compiled will optimize out the code.

-Saravana

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 4:43 PM Saravana Kannan [off-list ref] wrote:

When CONFIG_OF_IRQ is not defined, it doesn't make sense to parse
interrupts property.

Also, parsing and tracking interrupts property breaks some PPC
devices[1].  But none of the IRQ drivers in PPC seem ready to be
converted to a proper platform (or any bus) driver. So, there's not much
of a point in tracking the interrupts property for CONFIG_PPC. So, let's
stop parsing interrupts for CONFIG_PPC.

[1] - https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210213185422.GA195733@roeck-us.net/
Fixes: 4104ca776ba3 ("of: property: Add fw_devlink support for interrupts")
Reported-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <redacted>
---
Greg/Rob,

I believe this needs to land on driver-core-next.

Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>