Re: [PATCH 4/5] Centralise NO_IRQ definition

On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 11:12:36AM +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Matthew Wilcox <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > +#define NO_IRQ			((unsigned int)(-1))
> 
> Should this be wrapped with #ifndef?

*sigh*.  The one piece of feedback I got on the last series was from
Ingo, and he asked that I *not* wrap it with ifndef.  So, no.
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH 4/5] Centralise NO_IRQ definition
    • From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH 4/5] Centralise NO_IRQ definition
    • From: Matthew Wilcox <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 4/5] Centralise NO_IRQ definition
    • From: David Howells <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: [patch 12/12] mm: rmap opt
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] Marvell SATA fixes v2
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 4/5] Centralise NO_IRQ definition
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 4/5] Centralise NO_IRQ definition
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]