From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754901AbYBDF4N (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2008 00:56:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753988AbYBDF4A (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2008 00:56:00 -0500 Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:49877 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751242AbYBDFz6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2008 00:55:58 -0500 From: Rusty Russell To: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] request_irq() always returns -EINVAL with a NULL handler. Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:55:36 +1100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405) Cc: Jeff Garzik , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <200801171757.59026.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <20080202221502.76d48ead.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080202221502.76d48ead.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200802041655.36772.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sunday 03 February 2008 17:15:02 Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:57:58 +1100 Rusty Russell wrote: > > I assume that these ancient network drivers were trying to find out if > > an irq is available. eepro.c expecting +EBUSY was doubly wrong. > > > > I'm not sure that can_request_irq() is the right thing, but these drivers > > are definitely wrong. > > > > request_irq should BUG() on bad input, and these would have been found > > earlier. > > This breaks non-CONFIG_GENERIC_HARDIRQS architectures. > > alpha: > > drivers/net/3c503.c: In function 'el2_open': > drivers/net/3c503.c:382: error: implicit declaration of function > 'can_request_irq' Since this code was non-functional before, should we just be removing the "check if irq is free" check altogether? This is Jeff's call, I think. Rusty.