On Fri, 2013-08-09 at 08:15 +0530, Kumar Gaurav wrote: > On Friday 09 August 2013 08:09 AM, Joe Perches wrote: [] > > And, maybe it'd be better to use IRQF_TRIGGER_NONE > > instead of 0. > I tried googling what to replace IRQF_DISABLED with but found nothing. > In the patch fixed earlier (not by me) it was replaced with 0 so i did > same. But from now on I'll use IRQF_TRIGGER_NONE. Thanks Maybe that's not the right thing to do. 0 is what's almost exclusively used. IRQF_TRIGGER_NONE is only used a few times. It's also a lot longer. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
