lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] irq: handle irq0 special only on x86
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 08:40:11AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 12/10/2009 12:24 AM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> >
> > Note, I fully agree to use 0 for NO_IRQ if you have an int-sized value
> > that holds either NO_IRQ or a valid irq number. But in practise I'd not
> > recommend to use this idiom.
> >
>
> You're tilting at windmills about something that was settled long ago,
> like it or not.
And what about the patch, not judging my comments about irq0 in general?

AFAICT the check in try_misrouted_irq for irq being not zero does only
make sense on x86, doesn't it?

The comment a few lines above the check reads:

But for 'irqfixup == 2' we also do it for handled interrupts if
they are marked as IRQF_IRQPOLL (or for irq zero, which is the
traditional PC timer interrupt.. Legacy)

So I think the patch is justified.

Best regards
Uwe

--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-12-16 15:07    [W:0.111 / U:0.404 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site