johnlinn@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Yes I'll have a look at it, sorry for the hassle.
I'm assuming I need to try it against linus
tree as something may have changed. Or some other tree?
Or you are assuimg NO_IRQ is defined everywhere which it isn't. The
kernel mainstream just uses zero as intended not a define for it.
Alan
Ahh... maybe I see, it's only defined in ARM and that's what I was building
for. I'm a little slow sometimes, but I'll get there.
Gotcha, replace with 0. Thanks.
I don't agree with this change. NO_IRQ for microblaze, arm and other is -1. BTW:
For ppc is 0. Using NO_IRQ seems to me reasonable.
you are including linux/irq.h which include asm/irq.h for all platforms except
s390. I think that is better to find out where the real problem is instead of
using any hardcoded value.
If I look at xuartps_get_port function then you don't even need to initialize it
to NO_IRQ because if there is no IRQ connected driver is not probed. That's why
"port->irq = res2->start;" is enough.
I would suggest to completely remove that line from xuartps_get_port
Michal
--
Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng)
PetaLogix - Linux Solutions for a Reconfigurable World
w: www.petalogix.com p: +61-7-30090663,+42-0-721842854 f: +61-7-30090663
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
