Zero and negative number is not a valid IRQ for in-kernel code and the
irq_of_parse_and_map() function returns zero on error.  So this check for
valid IRQs should only accept values > 0.

Fixes: 44dab88e7cc9 ("spi: add spi_ppc4xx driver")
Signed-off-by: Ma Ke <make24@iscas.ac.cn>
---
Changes in v4:
- fixed a typo in v3. Sorry for the error in the patch v3.
Changes in v3:
- removed Cc stable line as suggestions.
Changes in v2:
- added Cc stable line;
- added Fixes line.
---
 drivers/spi/spi-ppc4xx.c | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-ppc4xx.c b/drivers/spi/spi-ppc4xx.c
index 942c3117ab3a..01fdecbf132d 100644
--- a/drivers/spi/spi-ppc4xx.c
+++ b/drivers/spi/spi-ppc4xx.c
@@ -413,6 +413,9 @@ static int spi_ppc4xx_of_probe(struct platform_device *op)
 
 	/* Request IRQ */
 	hw->irqnum = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 0);
+	if (hw->irqnum <= 0)
+		goto free_host;
+
 	ret = request_irq(hw->irqnum, spi_ppc4xx_int,
 			  0, "spi_ppc4xx_of", (void *)hw);
 	if (ret) {
-- 
2.25.1

On Wed, 24 Jul 2024 16:40:47 +0800, Ma Ke wrote:
> Zero and negative number is not a valid IRQ for in-kernel code and the
> irq_of_parse_and_map() function returns zero on error.  So this check for
> valid IRQs should only accept values > 0.
> 
> 

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/spi.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/1] spi: ppc4xx: handle irq_of_parse_and_map() errors
      commit: 0f245463b01ea254ae90e1d0389e90b0e7d8dc75

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark

…
> Signed-off-by: Ma Ke <make24@iscas.ac.cn>

Does anybody care more for the applicability of such information?
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.10#n398
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/researcher-guidelines.rst?h=v6.10#n5


> ---
> Changes in v4:
> - fixed a typo in v3. Sorry for the error in the patch v3.
…

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/20240722141822.1052370-1-make24@iscas.ac.cn/

How could the published development mistake happen at all in your research organisation?

Regards,
Markus

On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 01:35:52PM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:
> …
> > Signed-off-by: Ma Ke <make24@iscas.ac.cn>
> 
> Does anybody care more for the applicability of such information?
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.10#n398
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/researcher-guidelines.rst?h=v6.10#n5

Feel free to ignore Markus, he has a long history of sending
unhelpful review comments and continues to ignore repeated requests
to stop.

>> …
>>> Signed-off-by: Ma Ke <make24@iscas.ac.cn>
>>
>> Does anybody care more for the applicability of such information?
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.10#n398
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/researcher-guidelines.rst?h=v6.10#n5
>
> Feel free to ignore Markus, he has a long history of sending
> unhelpful review comments and continues to ignore repeated requests
> to stop.

This seems to be another automated response which does not take meaningful facts
into account (as intended).
Further collateral evolution might become more interesting.

Regards,
Markus