Re: [PATCH] ata: Don't use NO_IRQ in pata_of_platform driver

[Jeff Garzik]

On 11/10/2011 11:28 AM, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> Drivers should not use NO_IRQ; moreover, some architectures don't
> have it nowadays. '0' is the 'no irq' case.
>
> Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov<cbouatmailru@xxxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Alan Cox<alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 03:38:16PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 19:26:06 +0400
> > Anton Vorontsov<cbouatmailru@xxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
> >
> > > Drivers should not use NO_IRQ; moreover, some architectures don't
> > > have it nowadays. '0' is the 'no irq' case.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov<cbouatmailru@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Acked-by: Alan Cox<alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> In case if we don't want a "band-aid fix" for 3.2, here is the patch
> that just does the proper fix (w/ a risk to break minor architectures).
>
>   drivers/ata/pata_of_platform.c |    2 +-
>   1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_of_platform.c b/drivers/ata/pata_of_platform.c
> index a72ab0d..2a472c5 100644
> --- a/drivers/ata/pata_of_platform.c
> +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_of_platform.c
> @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ static int __devinit pata_of_platform_probe(struct platform_device *ofdev)
>   	}
>
>   	ret = of_irq_to_resource(dn, 0,&irq_res);
> -	if (ret == NO_IRQ)
> +	if (!ret)
>   		irq_res.start = irq_res.end = 0;
>   	else
>   		irq_res.flags = 0;

Unless someone screams, that is what I'll push upstream.

	Jeff


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