On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 03:41:19PM -0500, Matt Sealey wrote: > There is a simple problem with the patch which is that an "IRQ 0" can and does > actually exist on a bunch of platforms, at least to the best of my knowledge. > > Checking for -1 (which means for definite, no irq at all, because it is > totally unambiguous, as a -1 IRQ numbering is "impossible") is more correct. This was discussed years ago. http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/11/22/159 http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/11/22/227 -- Anton Vorontsov email: cbouatmailru@xxxxxxxxx irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html