On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 03:41:19PM -0500, Matt Sealey wrote: > There is a simple problem with the patch which is that an "IRQ 0" can and does > actually exist on a bunch of platforms, at least to the best of my knowledge. > > Checking for -1 (which means for definite, no irq at all, because it is > totally unambiguous, as a -1 IRQ numbering is "impossible") is more correct.
This was discussed years ago. http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/11/22/159 http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/11/22/227 -- Anton Vorontsov email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2 _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
