[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091216174749.277761fe@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:47:49 +0000
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Vrabel <dvrabel@...om.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Urs Thuermann <urs.thuermann@...kswagen.de>,
Oliver Hartkopp <oliver.hartkopp@...kswagen.de>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Kurt Van Dijck <kurt.van.dijck@....be>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] can/at91: don't check platform_get_irq's return
value against zero
> + if (!res || irq <= (int)NO_IRQ) {
>
> but this looks too ugly. (IMHO using NO_IRQ is already ugly.)
No IRQ was a private variable for the drivers/ide stack internally and
only present in any form on a few odd platforms where it got "borrowed"
and hasn't yet been eliminated
The absence of an IRQ is zero. A bus IRQ of zero is remapped by the OS.
Alan
--
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