Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 10:21:41 -0600
From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com>
Cc: Frederik Deweerdt <deweerdt@free.fr>, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
       "J.A. Magall??n" <jamagallon@ono.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
       "Linux-Kernel," <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.18-mm2
Message-ID: <20060930162141.GB16272@parisc-linux.org>
References: <20060928014623.ccc9b885.akpm@osdl.org> <20060929155738.7076f0c8@werewolf> <20060929143949.GL5017@parisc-linux.org> <1159550143.13029.36.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060929235054.GB2020@slug> <1159629982.14918.4.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1159629982.14918.4.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 911
Lines: 27

On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 10:26:22AM -0500, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-09-29 at 23:50 +0000, Frederik Deweerdt wrote:
> > +       if (!pdev->irq)
> > +               return -ENODEV;
> > +
> 
> Don't I remember that 0 is a valid IRQ on some platforms?
> 
> i.e. shouldn't this be
> 
> if (pdev->irq == NO_IRQ)
> 	return -ENODEV;
> 
> ?
> 
> I think this won't quite work because only the platforms that actually
> have a valid zero irq define it, but there must be something else that
> works.

Linus threw a hissy fit and declared that platforms which use 0 as a
valid IRQ are broken and wrong.  Despite PCI using 255 to mean no IRQ
and 0 as a valid IRQ ;-)
-
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/