[PATCH 1/7] irqchip/stm32-exti: set_affinity return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE if no parent

[Antonio Borneo]

Hi Marc,

On Tue, 2022-05-10 at 19:34 +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Antonio,
> 
> On Tue, 10 May 2022 17:41:17 +0100,
> Antonio Borneo <antonio.borneo at foss.st.com> wrote:
> > 
> > From: Ludovic Barre <ludovic.barre at foss.st.com>
> > 
> > If no parent, there is no specific action to do in
> > stm32 irqchip, and so return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre <ludovic.barre at foss.st.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Antonio Borneo <antonio.borneo at foss.st.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c
> > b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c
> > index 9d18f47040eb..10c9c742c216 100644
> > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c
> > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-stm32-exti.c
> > @@ -614,7 +614,7 @@ static int stm32_exti_h_set_affinity(struct
> > irq_data *d,
> >         if (d->parent_data->chip)
> >                 return irq_chip_set_affinity_parent(d, dest,
> > force);
> >  
> > -       return -EINVAL;
> > +       return IRQ_SET_MASK_OK_DONE;
> >  }
> >  
> >  static int __maybe_unused stm32_exti_h_suspend(void)
> 
> <rant>
> Can you *please* use a cover-letter when sending more that a single
> patch? I expect there is an overarching motive to this series. Where
> is it described?
> 
> Also, please look at the way the subject lines are written for most
> irqchip patches:
> 
> irqchip/foo: Frobify the bar callback return value
> 
> Note the capital letter after the ':', and the fact that it starts
> with a verb. Here, I would have liked to see:
> 
> irqchip/stm32-exti: Fix set_affinity() return value
> 
> and leave the meat of the description to the commit log (instead of
> saying the exact same thing twice).
> </rant>

thanks for your review and the hints on this series.
I will shortly send a V2.

Regards,
Antonio