Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756075AbYHCGne (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Aug 2008 02:43:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752027AbYHCGnK (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Aug 2008 02:43:10 -0400 Received: from out02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.232]:42001 "EHLO out02.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751397AbYHCGnI (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Aug 2008 02:43:08 -0400 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: "Yinghai Lu" Cc: "Ingo Molnar" , "Thomas Gleixner" , "H. Peter Anvin" , "Dhaval Giani" , "Mike Travis" , "Andrew Morton" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1217732365-16595-1-git-send-email-yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> <86802c440808022304g41749d9dn7688c81c3fdbed8a@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2008 23:39:18 -0700 In-Reply-To: <86802c440808022304g41749d9dn7688c81c3fdbed8a@mail.gmail.com> (Yinghai Lu's message of "Sat, 2 Aug 2008 23:04:18 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 24.130.11.59 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa04 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ;"Yinghai Lu" X-Spam-Relay-Country: X-Spam-Report: * -1.8 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG * -2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0038] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa04 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.0 XM_SPF_Neutral SPF-Neutral Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/25] dyn_array and nr_irqs support v3 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 (built Thu, 03 Mar 2005 10:44:12 +0100) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mgr1.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1261 Lines: 38 "Yinghai Lu" writes: > On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 10:51 PM, Eric W. Biederman > wrote: >> >> It appears that quite a few of the places you have changed are testing >> to see if an irq is valid. The idiomatic way to perform that test in >> the kernel is: >> >> if (irq) > > is uninitialized irq to be -1 or 0? 0. There is a long history behind it, but by decree of Linus and to conform with reasonable intuition 0 is not a valid irq except in certain arch specific corner cases. >> With no test to see if you are >= NR_IRQS. >> >> I expect that is the change we want in the drivers that are performing such a > silly >> extra check. > > is_irq_valid(irq_no) ? > > wait to see your new patchset about dyn irq_cfg and irq_desc I haven't promised one, at least not lately. I went down a couple of blind alleys and figured out what needed to be accomplished and then ran out of steam about a year and a half 2 years ago, and I haven't been able to get back to it. Eric -- 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/