[lkml]   [2006]   [Nov]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] serial: Use real irq on UART0 (IRQ = 0) on PPC4xx systems
On Mon, 20 Nov 2006, Russell King wrote:

> > On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 12:54:32 +0100 (MET)
> > Stefan Roese <> wrote:
> > > Let's see, if I got this right. You mean that on such a platform, where 0 is a
> > > valid physical IRQ, we should assign another value as virtual IRQ number (not
> > > 0 and not -1 of course). And then the platform "pic" implementation should
> > > take care of the remapping of these virtual IRQ numbers to the physical
> > > numbers.
> Since IRQ0 is not valid, can we arrange for the generic interrupt
> infrastructure to always fail it's allocation, and then remove the
> utterly unused bloatful irq_desc[0] ?
> Didn't think so since x86 folk would scream. Wait a moment, x86 can
> map IRQ0 to some other number for the timer interrupt, just like
> other architectures are being forced to map their UART interrupts.

I think, what Russell means, is this:

#define is_real_interrupt(irq) ((irq) != NO_IRQ)

where the NO_IRQ macro has been introduced a LONG time ago specifically
for this purpose, and is conveniently defined on some platforms to
(unsigned int)-1 or similar, including asm-powerpc/irq.h. And yes, this
has been discussed MANY times.

Guennadi Liakhovetski
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: 2006-11-20 22:25    [W:0.032 / U:4.368 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site