From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE50BDDF3F for ; Fri, 1 Jun 2007 17:47:45 +1000 (EST) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Use NO_IRQ not IRQ_NONE From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Michael Ellerman In-Reply-To: <526423a25b0e40c03678f4bb1d56e4b5719ab74d.1180682602.git.michael@ellerman.id.au> References: <526423a25b0e40c03678f4bb1d56e4b5719ab74d.1180682602.git.michael@ellerman.id.au> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:47:32 +1000 Message-Id: <1180684052.19517.422.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Paul Mackerras List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 17:23 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > There is a thinko in the irq code, it uses IRQ_NONE to indicate no irq, > whereas it should be using NO_IRQ. IRQ_NONE is returned from irq handlers > to say "not handled". > > As it happens they currently have the same value (0), so this is just for > future proof-ness. > > Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman Acked-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt --- My fault actually :-) Mostly a typo, it's right elsewhere in the code except in those 3 occurences. Brown paper bag time for me. Cheers, Ben.