[lkml]   [2005]   [Nov]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/5] Centralise NO_IRQ definition

On Tue, 22 Nov 2005, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > The fact is, 0 _is_ special. Not just for hardware, but because 0 has a
> > magical meaning as "false" in the C language.
> I don't agree, irq 0 has been a valid irq on a number of platforms for
> ages

The point is, it's _not_ a valid irq for 99.9% of all machines and drivers
that have ever been tested.

Also, if you don't agree that 0 is special in the C language, then you're
just strictly _wrong_. It's an undeniable fact that zero _is_ special.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:0.142 / U:39.736 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site