On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 12:00:12PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > 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. So we now try to hide the fact that there _is_ an interrupt called 0 on x86 systems? Sorry, I can't that that seriously in any way. -- 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
