Re: [PATCH] sh: Avoid using IRQ0 on SH3 and SH4
From: Sergey Shtylyov
Date: Wed Jul 12 2023 - 12:24:09 EST
On 7/12/23 6:38 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
[...]
>>>> Sent: 09 July 2023 00:13
>>> ....
>>>> Looking at arch/sh/boards/mach-r2d/irq.c, there is some IRQ translation going
>>>> on and maybe that's the part where we need to correct the offset by 16?
>>>
>>> Would it be less problematic to use (say) 16 for IRQ_0
>>> leaving IRQ_1+ as 1+ ?
>>
>> I don't think so.
>>
>>> At least that would only cause issues for code that needed
>>> to use IRQ_0.
>>>
>>> (It has to be said that making IRQ 0 invalid seemed wrong
>>> to me. x86 (IBM PC) gets away with it because IRQ 0 is
>>> always assigned to platform specific hardware.)
>>
>> Not only x86, IIRC.
>> Have you seen the commit below?
>>
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=ce753ad1549cbe9ccaea4c06a1f5fa47432c8289
>>
>
> Quoting:
>
> using IRQ0 is considered invalid (according to Linus) outside the arch/ code
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^> The changes here were made _in_ the arch code. While there may be valid
> arguments for doing that, quoting the above commit as reason isn't really
> sufficient.
It seems you still don't understand... The i8253 drivers using IRQ0 live in
the arch/{mips|x86}/kernel/ code, so they're allowed to claim IRQ0 via calling
request_irq() (MIPS still does it. They are NOT the platform drivers we're
dealing with here...
> Guenter
MBR, Sergey