[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdXQ0TahPcwDiLsN5s0rLRny3WcFLnCw-R_ZFkuO0T1RrQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 19:15:46 +0100
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Dave Martin <dave.martin@...aro.org>
Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@...il.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...hat.com>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ata: Don't use NO_IRQ in pata_of_platform driver
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 19:02, Dave Martin <dave.martin@...aro.org> wrote:
> Unfortunately, NO_IRQ is often not spelled "NO_IRQ". It looks like the assumption
> "irq < 0 === no irq" may be quite a lot more widespread than "NO_IRQ === no irq".
Can we make irq unsigned, and hope the compiler catches all of them
(comparison always
false blah blah blah)?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
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
--
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