[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080914154225.GM29290@elte.hu>
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2008 17:42:25 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Dean Nelson <dcn@....com>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Alan Mayer <ajm@....com>, jeremy@...p.org,
rusty@...tcorp.com.au, suresh.b.siddha@...el.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Yinghai Lu <Yinghai.lu@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 4/4] switch non-standard SYSCALL_VECTOR allocation to use
vector_irq[]
* Dean Nelson <dcn@....com> wrote:
> + ret = __grab_irq_vector(NON_IRQ_DESC, syscall_vector,
> + &cpu_possible_map);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vector_lock, flags);
> + if (ret == false) {
> + printk("lg: couldn't reserve syscall %u\n",
> + syscall_vector);
> + return -EBUSY;
> + }
please use __grab_irq_vector() to standard return type: -EINVAL (or
-EBUSY) on failure, vector on success. That will get rid of the 'ret ==
false' ugliness too.
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists