On Fri, 2011-12-02 at 11:28 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Dave Martin <dave.martin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > This is now broken on ARM where, for good or bad, NO_IRQ currently is > > used and is -1. > > > > How do we resolve it? If we are ready to eliminate NO_IRQ from > > drivers/of/irq.c (or indeed, all code that uses it) and just use 0 for > > that case, we should surely just do it... but I'm not confident I can > > judge on that. > > Just stop using NO_IRQ. First in drivers/of/irq.c, then in any drivers > as you notice breakage. Agreed. In fact the whole hack in drivers/of/irq.c was to accomodate ARM which still uses -1, powerpc changed to 0 a long time ago. Now that we have a generic remapper between HW and "linux" IRQ numbers, there is no reason to stick to -1 even on ARM. > Don't *change* NO_IRQ to zero (that whole #define is broken - leave it > around as a marker of brokenness), just start removing it from all the > ARM drivers that use the OF infrastructure. Which is presumably not > all that many yet. > > So whenever you find breakage, the fix now is to just remove NO_IRQ > tests, and replace them with "!irq". Cheers, Ben. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
