On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 17:10 +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Jon, > > On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 10:39:43 -0500, Jon Smirl wrote: > > Here' s a version with the compares to zero switched to NO_IRQ. If I > > understand how NO_IRQ works it is the correct change. My understanding > > is that under ppc IRQ zero was legal and NO_IRQ was -1. But then the > > whole kernel switched to NO_IRQ = zero. Powerpc updated to NO_IRQ=0 > > and used virtual IRQs to move a physical IRQ 0 to another IRQ number. > > ppc was not changed. This driver does not appear to have been updated > > to track this global change since it didn't initially use the NO_IRQ > > define everywhere. > > As I have already applied the part of this patch that preserves error > values in error paths, can you please send an incremental patch that > only fixes the IRQ issues? These are separate issues so it's better to > have separate patches anyway.
To be clear, nowadays, checking against 0 is correct unless you intend the driver to work with arch/ppc (which we'll deprecate soon). Ben. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
