The fwnode_irq_get() and the fwnode_irq_get_byname() may have returned
zero if mapping the IRQ fails. This contradicts the
fwnode_irq_get_byname() documentation. Furthermore, returning zero or
errno on error is unepected and can easily lead to problems
like:

int probe(foo)
{
...
	ret = fwnode_irq_get_byname(...);
	if (ret < 0)
		return ret;
...
}

or

int probe(foo)
{
...
	ret = fwnode_irq_get_byname(...);
	if (ret <= 0)
		return ret;
...
}

which are both likely to be wrong. First treats zero as successful call and
misses the IRQ mapping failure. Second returns zero from probe even though
it detects the IRQ mapping failure correvtly.

Here we change the fwnode_irq_get() and the fwnode_irq_get_byname() to
always return a negative errno upon failure.

I have audited following callers (v6.4-rc2):

fwnode_irq_get_byname():
drivers/i2c/i2c-smbus.c
drivers/iio/accel/adxl355_core.c
drivers/iio/accel/kionix-kx022a.c
drivers/iio/adc/ad4130.c
drivers/iio/adc/max11410.c
drivers/iio/addac/ad74115.c
drivers/iio/gyro/fxas21002c_core.c
drivers/iio/imu/adis16480.c
drivers/iio/imu/bmi160/bmi160_core.c
drivers/iio/imu/bmi160/bmi160_core.c

fwnode_irq_get():
drivers/gpio/gpio-dwapb.c
drivers/iio/chemical/scd30_serial.c
drivers/iio/proximity/mb1232.c
drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvpp2/mvpp2_main.c
drivers/net/mdio/fwnode_mdio.c
drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c
drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-microchip-sgpio.c
drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-pistachio.c

and it seems to me these calls will be Ok after the change. The
i2c-smbus.c and kionix-kx022a.c will gain a functional change (bugfix?) as
after this patch the probe will return -EINVAL should the IRQ mapping fail.
The series will also adjust the return value check for zero to be omitted.

NOTES:

Changes are compile-tested only.

drivers/pinctrl/nuvoton/pinctrl-wpcm450.c
will also gain a functional change. The pinctrl-wpcm450.c change is easy
to see - after this series the device-tree mapping failures will be
handled as any other errors - probe will be aborted with -EINVAL. Other
feasible option could be treating other errors in IRQ getting same way
as the DT mapping failures - just silently skip the IRQ. Please see
comment in the respective patch.

drivers/iio/cdc/ad7150.c
Changed logic so that all the IRQ getting errors jump to the same
'no-IRQ' branch as the DT mapping error did.

Revision history:
v6 => v7:
 - re-ordered patches per subsystem
 - mvpp2 - added a patch for not shadowing the return value
v5 => v6:
 - iio: cdc: ad7150 - never abort probe if IRQ getting fails
v4 => v5:
 - Fix subject lines for mvpp2 and wpcm450
 - drop unnecessary irqno assignment from mb1232
 - add back the drivers/i2c/i2c-smbus.c change which was accidentally
   dropped during v3 => v4 work
v3 => v4:
 - Change also the fwnode_irq_get() as was suggested by Jonathan.
Changelog v2 => v3:
 - rebase/resend/add kx022a fix.
Changelog v1 => v2:
 - minor styling

---

Matti Vaittinen (9):
  drivers: fwnode: fix fwnode_irq_get[_byname]()
  iio: mb1232: relax return value check for IRQ get
  iio: cdc: ad7150: relax return value check for IRQ get
  pinctrl: wpcm450: relax return value check for IRQ get
  pinctrl: ingenic: relax return value check for IRQ get
  pinctrl: pistachio: relax return value check for IRQ get
  i2c: i2c-smbus: fwnode_irq_get_byname() return value fix
  net-next: mvpp2: relax return value check for IRQ get
  net-next: mvpp2: don't shadow error

 drivers/base/property.c                         | 12 +++++++++---
 drivers/i2c/i2c-smbus.c                         |  2 +-
 drivers/iio/cdc/ad7150.c                        | 10 +++++-----
 drivers/iio/proximity/mb1232.c                  |  7 ++-----
 drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvpp2/mvpp2_main.c | 12 ++++++------
 drivers/pinctrl/nuvoton/pinctrl-wpcm450.c       |  2 --
 drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ingenic.c               |  2 --
 drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-pistachio.c             |  6 ------
 8 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)


base-commit: f1fcbaa18b28dec10281551dfe6ed3a3ed80e3d6
-- 
2.40.1


-- 
Matti Vaittinen, Linux device drivers
ROHM Semiconductors, Finland SWDC
Kiviharjunlenkki 1E
90220 OULU
FINLAND

~~~ "I don't think so," said Rene Descartes. Just then he vanished ~~~
Simon says - in Latin please.
~~~ "non cogito me" dixit Rene Descarte, deinde evanescavit ~~~
Thanks to Simon Glass for the translation =] 

On Mon, 29 May 2023 09:22:15 +0300 Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> The fwnode_irq_get() and the fwnode_irq_get_byname() may have returned
> zero if mapping the IRQ fails. This contradicts the
> fwnode_irq_get_byname() documentation. Furthermore, returning zero or
> errno on error is unepected and can easily lead to problems
> like.

What's the merging plan? Could patch 1 go to a stable branch 
and then driver trees can pull it in and apply their respective 
patches locally?

On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 11:34:38PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Mon, 29 May 2023 09:22:15 +0300 Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> > The fwnode_irq_get() and the fwnode_irq_get_byname() may have returned
> > zero if mapping the IRQ fails. This contradicts the
> > fwnode_irq_get_byname() documentation. Furthermore, returning zero or
> > errno on error is unepected and can easily lead to problems
> > like.
> 
> What's the merging plan? Could patch 1 go to a stable branch 
> and then driver trees can pull it in and apply their respective 
> patches locally?

I'll take patch 1 now, and then after 6.5-rc1, Matti, can you send the
cleanup patches to the respective subsystems?

thanks,

greg k-h

On 6/15/23 14:37, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 11:34:38PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> On Mon, 29 May 2023 09:22:15 +0300 Matti Vaittinen wrote:
>>> The fwnode_irq_get() and the fwnode_irq_get_byname() may have returned
>>> zero if mapping the IRQ fails. This contradicts the
>>> fwnode_irq_get_byname() documentation. Furthermore, returning zero or
>>> errno on error is unepected and can easily lead to problems
>>> like.
>>
>> What's the merging plan? Could patch 1 go to a stable branch
>> and then driver trees can pull it in and apply their respective
>> patches locally?
> 
> I'll take patch 1 now, and then after 6.5-rc1, Matti, can you send the
> cleanup patches to the respective subsystems?

Yes. I can re-spin the rest of the patches.

Yours,
	-- Matti

> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

-- 
Matti Vaittinen
Linux kernel developer at ROHM Semiconductors
Oulu Finland

~~ When things go utterly wrong vim users can always type :help! ~~

On Thu, 15 Jun 2023 13:37:17 +0200 Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > What's the merging plan? Could patch 1 go to a stable branch 
> > and then driver trees can pull it in and apply their respective 
> > patches locally?  
> 
> I'll take patch 1 now, and then after 6.5-rc1, Matti, can you send the
> cleanup patches to the respective subsystems?

👍️👍️