On 18-08-16 21:29, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
Hello Arend,
Thanks a lot for your feedback.
On 08/18/2016 03:14 PM, Arend van Spriel wrote:
quoted
On 18-08-16 16:17, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
quoted
If request_irq() fails in mwifiex_sdio_probe_of(), only an error message
is printed but the actual error is not propagated to the caller function.
Hmm. The caller function, ie. mwifiex_sdio_probe(), does not seem to care.
Hmm, I'm not so sure about that. It's checking the wifiex_sdio_probe_of()
return value.
Ok. I looked at 4.7 sources on lxr [1].
If the IRQ request failing is not an error, then at the very least the call
to disable_irq() should be avoided if request_irq() fails, and the message
should be changed from dev_err() to dev_dgb() or dev_info().
agree.
quoted
The device may still function without this wake interrupt.
That's correct, the binding says that the "interrupts" property in the child
node is optional since is just a wakeup IRQ. Now the question is if should
be an error if the IRQ is defined but fails to be requested.
Clearly it indicates an error in the DT specification so behavior is not
as expected. Personally I would indeed consider it an error, but I was
just indicating that it might have done like this intentionally.
Regards,
Arend
[1]
http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/sdio.c#L192
quoted
Regards,
Arend
Best regards,