Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 10 Feb 2008 18:59:39 +0100 (CET) | From | Guennadi Liakhovetski <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Define a NO_GPIO macro to compare against and to use as an invalid GPIO |
| |
David, you convinced me:-) I'll redo the patch. Just one comment:
On Sat, 9 Feb 2008, David Brownell wrote:
> On Saturday 09 February 2008, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > > > And when those platforms share drivers, problems > > arise. And the simple and efficient NO_IRQ notion, that would fis those > > problems nicely, cannot seem to establish itself. > > Inertia is one of the problems there ... plus, the only > obvious advantage of "#define NO_IRQ 0" is that it makes > it easier to be lazy about initialization. > > Plus, changing platforms to use that convention means they > mostly need to adopt an *unnatural* step of mapping from the > hardware IRQ numbers (which often start at zero, as they do > on one system I just ssh'd into) to some "logical" ID. > Even if you believe that's worthwhile, it's work; and it > could easily break something.
NO_IRQ doesn't have to be 0. Platforms, where 0 is a valid number can use -1, or 256, or whatever they want:-)
Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski
| |