From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: nicolas.pitre@linaro.org (Nicolas Pitre) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 14:11:42 -0500 (EST) Subject: [PATCH] ata: Don't use NO_IRQ in pata_of_platform driver In-Reply-To: <20111206093709.GB2274@linaro.org> References: <20111110162859.GA7088@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> <20111202192618.GC3037@localhost.localdomain> <1322867573.11728.22.camel@pasglop> <20111205161157.GA27550@localhost.localdomain> <20111205180253.GB29812@localhost.localdomain> <20111205192605.GD29812@localhost.localdomain> <20111206093709.GB2274@linaro.org> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, 6 Dec 2011, Dave Martin wrote: > On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 02:49:01PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > > No need to convert everything. > > > > First move is to make irq=0 meaning no IRQ. That means making things > > like: > > > > if (irq < 0) > > if (irq >= 0) > > > > into > > > > if (irq <= 0) > > if (irq > 0) > > > > And replace NO_IRQ with 0. > > > > That change shouldn't break anything, except those drivers which are 1) > > being passed an actual IRQ #0 and 2) testing for no IRQ. I suspect that > > those conditions aren't very common together. > > To clarify, you're suggesting that the meanings of all other IRQ values > would not change initially? Initially, or even ever. > (i.e., we remap HW irq 0, if there is one, > to some other random number but have a 1:1 mapping for everything else). Exact. > That could make sense as an approach. You might notice that a true IRQ #0 passed to generic drivers is not really frequent. Nicolas