Hello Geert, On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 10:01:14AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Also IMHO, the dummy value handling is a red herring. Contrary to > optional clocks and resets, a missing optional interrupt does not > always mean there is nothing to do: in case of polling, something > else must definitely be done.
Note this is exactly why I don't like this change. I'd even go so far and claim that "a missing optional interrupt hardly ever means there is nothing to do". > So even if request_irq() would accept a dummy interrupt zero and just > do nothing, it would give the false impression that that is all there > is to do, while an actual check for zero with polling code handling > may still need to be present, thus leading to more not less bugs. Yes, a dummy irq value will just not be possible. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Openipmi-developer mailing list Openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openipmi-developer
