On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 11:46, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > But.. let's make one thing clear: Alan Cox and Linus have been going on > about how IRQ0 should not be used. Let's be crystal clear: even x86 > uses IRQ0. It happens to be the PIC timer, and that gets claimed early > on during the x86 boot. So please don't tell me that x86 avoids IRQ0. > It doesn't. It just happens that x86 never shows IRQ0 to anything but > the i8253 PIC driver. It's shown in /proc/interrupts due to a "bug" in show_interrupts(). The (gmail damaged) patch below fixes this bug. >From 46f51a2d42548358868a34df00c2a4e47bbdf691 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Geert Uytterhoeven <Geert.Uytterhoeven@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 11:55:05 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] /proc/interrupts: irq zero is invalid As zero is an invalid irq number, show_interrupts() should not try to print it. Just return after printing the header for i == 0. Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- kernel/irq/proc.c | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/irq/proc.c b/kernel/irq/proc.c index 4bd4faa..5b8bbf0 100644 --- a/kernel/irq/proc.c +++ b/kernel/irq/proc.c @@ -439,6 +439,7 @@ int show_interrupts(struct seq_file *p, void *v) for_each_online_cpu(j) seq_printf(p, "CPU%-8d", j); seq_putc(p, '\n'); + return 0; } desc = irq_to_desc(i); -- 1.7.0.4 Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds -- 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