Re: IDE IRQ probe brokenness.

From: Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk)
Date: Tue Jun 10 2003 - 13:37:50 EST

Next message: Davide Libenzi: "Re: Coding standards. (Was: Re: [PATCH] [2.5] Non-blocking write can block)"
Previous message: Andreas Achtzehn: "PROBLEM: pppoe.o module + socket filtering"
In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: IDE IRQ probe brokenness."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 05:42:41PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> Basically we need a "NOT_AN_IRQ" value defined either globally or per
> port

All it needs is for someone to add the definition for NO_IRQ to all
architecture header files. ARM has an established use of NO_IRQ
already with currently 34 uses:

/*
* Use this value to indicate lack of interrupt
* capability
*/
#ifndef NO_IRQ
#define NO_IRQ ((unsigned int)(-1))
#endif

I'd prefer not to do another mindless time wasteful change just because
someone decides to use a different name.

-- Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk) The developer of ARM Linux http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Davide Libenzi: "Re: Coding standards. (Was: Re: [PATCH] [2.5] Non-blocking write can block)"
Previous message: Andreas Achtzehn: "PROBLEM: pppoe.o module + socket filtering"
In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: IDE IRQ probe brokenness."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jun 15 2003 - 22:00:24 EST