On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Grant Likely <[email protected]> wrote:
> NO_IRQ is evil. Stop using it in arch/powerpc and powerpc device drivers
> diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_ssi.c b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_ssi.c
> index 3e06696..55c6ff9 100644
> --- a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_ssi.c
> +++ b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_ssi.c
> @@ -666,7 +666,7 @@ static int __devinit fsl_ssi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> ssi_private->ssi_phys = res.start;
>
> ssi_private->irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 0);
> - if (ssi_private->irq == NO_IRQ) {
> + if (!ssi_private->irq) {
> dev_err(&pdev->dev, "no irq for node %s\n", np->full_name);
> ret = -ENXIO;
> goto error_iomap;
What's the plan with this patch?
This is now failing on xtensa, as it's one of the architectures that doesn't
define NO_IRQ. Only arm, c6x, mn10300, openrisc, parisc, powerpc, and sparc
define it.
sound/soc/fsl/fsl_ssi.c:705:26: error: 'NO_IRQ' undeclared (first use
in this function)
make[4]: *** [sound/soc/fsl/fsl_ssi.o] Error 1
http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/buildresult/9187959/
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Grant Likely <[email protected]> wrote:
>> NO_IRQ is evil. Stop using it in arch/powerpc and powerpc device drivers
>
>> diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_ssi.c b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_ssi.c
>> index 3e06696..55c6ff9 100644
>> --- a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_ssi.c
>> +++ b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_ssi.c
>> @@ -666,7 +666,7 @@ static int __devinit fsl_ssi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> ssi_private->ssi_phys = res.start;
>>
>> ssi_private->irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 0);
>> - if (ssi_private->irq == NO_IRQ) {
>> + if (!ssi_private->irq) {
>> dev_err(&pdev->dev, "no irq for node %s\n", np->full_name);
>> ret = -ENXIO;
>> goto error_iomap;
>
> What's the plan with this patch?
>
> This is now failing on xtensa, as it's one of the architectures that doesn't
> define NO_IRQ. Only arm, c6x, mn10300, openrisc, parisc, powerpc, and sparc
> define it.
Wow. I'd pretty much dropped that patch because I didn't have time to
chase it down. It should be pursued though.
In that particular case it is safe I think to apply the change. PPC
defines NO_IRQ to be 0 anyway.
g.
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 5:56 AM, Grant Likely <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Grant Likely <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> NO_IRQ is evil. Stop using it in arch/powerpc and powerpc device drivers
>>
>>> diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_ssi.c b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_ssi.c
>>> index 3e06696..55c6ff9 100644
>>> --- a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_ssi.c
>>> +++ b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_ssi.c
>>> @@ -666,7 +666,7 @@ static int __devinit fsl_ssi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> ssi_private->ssi_phys = res.start;
>>>
>>> ssi_private->irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 0);
>>> - if (ssi_private->irq == NO_IRQ) {
>>> + if (!ssi_private->irq) {
>>> dev_err(&pdev->dev, "no irq for node %s\n", np->full_name);
>>> ret = -ENXIO;
>>> goto error_iomap;
>>
>> What's the plan with this patch?
>>
>> This is now failing on xtensa, as it's one of the architectures that doesn't
>> define NO_IRQ. Only arm, c6x, mn10300, openrisc, parisc, powerpc, and sparc
>> define it.
>
> Wow. I'd pretty much dropped that patch because I didn't have time to
> chase it down. It should be pursued though.
>
> In that particular case it is safe I think to apply the change. PPC
> defines NO_IRQ to be 0 anyway.
Note that we still have arches that define it as nonzero:
arch/arm/include/asm/irq.h:#define NO_IRQ ((unsigned int)(-1))
arch/mn10300/include/asm/irq.h:#define NO_IRQ INT_MAX
arch/openrisc/include/asm/irq.h:#define NO_IRQ (-1)
arch/parisc/include/asm/irq.h:#define NO_IRQ (-1)
arch/sparc/include/asm/irq_32.h:#define NO_IRQ 0xffffffff
arch/sparc/include/asm/irq_64.h:#define NO_IRQ 0xffffffff
Only c6x and powerpc use zero, and thus are ready to drop NO_IRQ.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 5:56 AM, Grant Likely <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Grant Likely <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> NO_IRQ is evil. Stop using it in arch/powerpc and powerpc device drivers
>>>
>>>> diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_ssi.c b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_ssi.c
>>>> index 3e06696..55c6ff9 100644
>>>> --- a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_ssi.c
>>>> +++ b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_ssi.c
>>>> @@ -666,7 +666,7 @@ static int __devinit fsl_ssi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>> ssi_private->ssi_phys = res.start;
>>>>
>>>> ssi_private->irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 0);
>>>> - if (ssi_private->irq == NO_IRQ) {
>>>> + if (!ssi_private->irq) {
>>>> dev_err(&pdev->dev, "no irq for node %s\n", np->full_name);
>>>> ret = -ENXIO;
>>>> goto error_iomap;
>>>
>>> What's the plan with this patch?
>>>
>>> This is now failing on xtensa, as it's one of the architectures that doesn't
>>> define NO_IRQ. Only arm, c6x, mn10300, openrisc, parisc, powerpc, and sparc
>>> define it.
>>
>> Wow. I'd pretty much dropped that patch because I didn't have time to
>> chase it down. It should be pursued though.
>>
>> In that particular case it is safe I think to apply the change. PPC
>> defines NO_IRQ to be 0 anyway.
>
> Note that we still have arches that define it as nonzero:
>
> arch/arm/include/asm/irq.h:#define NO_IRQ ((unsigned int)(-1))
> arch/mn10300/include/asm/irq.h:#define NO_IRQ INT_MAX
> arch/openrisc/include/asm/irq.h:#define NO_IRQ (-1)
> arch/parisc/include/asm/irq.h:#define NO_IRQ (-1)
> arch/sparc/include/asm/irq_32.h:#define NO_IRQ 0xffffffff
> arch/sparc/include/asm/irq_64.h:#define NO_IRQ 0xffffffff
>
> Only c6x and powerpc use zero, and thus are ready to drop NO_IRQ.
s390 just gained "NO_IRQ support" in -next, in commit
e15a9dcfdec29786d1830c5b7beaf02a288a89e1 ("s390: convert interrupt
handling to use generic hardirq"):
/* This number is used when no interrupt has been assigned */
#define NO_IRQ 0
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds