# Re: \[PATCH 7/8\] mwifiex: don't print an error if an optional DT property is missing

- From: Julian Calaby \<hidden\>
- Date: 2016-06-01 23:13:58 
- List: netdev
- Page: https://ratatoskr.run/netdev/2016/06/4762713
- Thread: https://ratatoskr.run/netdev/2016/05/4759065/t.md

```text
Hi Javier,

On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 11:51 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas
[ref] wrote:
> Hello Julian,
>
> Thanks a lot for your feedback and reviews.
>
> On 06/01/2016 12:20 AM, Julian Calaby wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 12:18 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas
>> [ref] wrote:
>>> The Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/marvell-sd8xxx.txt DT
>>> binding document say that the "interrupts" property in the child node is
>>> optional. So the property being missed shouldn't be treated as an error.
>>
>> Have you checked whether it is truly optional? I.e. nothing else
>> breaks if this property isn't set?
>>
>
> That's what the DT binding says and the IRQ is only used as a wakeup source
> during system suspend, it is not used during runtime. And that is why the
> mwifiex_sdio_probe_of() function does not fail if the IRQ is missing.

Awesome, that's what I wanted to know.

> Now, I just got to that conclusion by reading the binding docs, the message
> in the commits that introduced this and the driver code. Xinming Hu should
> comment on how critical this feature is for systems that needs to be wakeup.

Xinming, could you review this also?

> In any case I think that the code should be consistent with what the binding
> doc says and also the function does (i.e: dev_err only if returns an error).
>
>>> Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <redacted>
>>
>> Other than that, this looks sensible to me.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Julian Calaby <redacted>
>>
>
> Best regards,

Thanks,

-- 
Julian Calaby

Email: julian.calaby@gmail.com
Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/
```