[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wg2Pkb9kbfbstbB91AJA2SF6cySbsgHG-iQMq56j3VTcA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2022 10:22:08 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, alvaro.karsz@...id-run.com,
angus.chen@...uarmicro.com, gavinl@...dia.com, jasowang@...hat.com,
lingshan.zhu@...el.com, wangdeming@...pur.com,
xiujianfeng@...wei.com, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] virtio: fixes, features
On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 8:51 AM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Are you sure?
MichaelE is right.
This is just bogus historical garbage:
> arch/arm/include/asm/irq.h:#ifndef NO_IRQ
> arch/arm/include/asm/irq.h:#define NO_IRQ ((unsigned int)(-1))
that I've tried to get rid of for years, but for some reason it just won't die.
NO_IRQ should be zero. Or rather, it shouldn't exist at all. It's a bogus thing.
You can see just how bogus it is from grepping for it - the users are
all completely and utterly confused, and all are entirely historical
brokenness.
The correct way to check for "no irq" doesn't use NO_IRQ at all, it just does
if (dev->irq) ...
which is why you will only find a few instances of NO_IRQ in the tree
in the first place.
The NO_IRQ thing is mainly actually defined by a few drivers that just
never got converted to the proper world order, and even then you can
see the confusion (ie some drivers use "-1", others use "0", and yet
others use "((unsigned int)(-1)".
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists