Re: [PATCH 4/5] Centralise NO_IRQ definition

On Mon, 2005-11-21 at 13:38 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> The point is, it's _not_ a valid irq for 99.9% of all machines and drivers 
> that have ever been tested.

It is a valid irq for a wide range of embedded devices.

> Also, if you don't agree that 0 is special in the C language, then you're 
> just strictly _wrong_. It's an undeniable fact that zero _is_ special.

And ? I really don't agree that just because 0 "looks kewl", we should
enforce that and add some dodgy remapping all over the place.

It's not like it was difficult to fix the few drivers that make bogus
assumptions and use NO_IRQ instead ...

Ben.


-
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]>
  • Re: [PATCH 4/5] Centralise NO_IRQ definition
    • From: Matthew Wilcox <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 4/5] Centralise NO_IRQ definition
    • From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 4/5] Centralise NO_IRQ definition
    • From: Matthew Wilcox <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 4/5] Centralise NO_IRQ definition
    • From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 4/5] Centralise NO_IRQ definition
    • From: Matthew Wilcox <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 4/5] Centralise NO_IRQ definition
    • From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 4/5] Centralise NO_IRQ definition
    • From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 4/5] Centralise NO_IRQ definition
    • From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: VESA fb console in 2.6.15
• Next by Date: [RFC PATCH 3/3] move swiotlb header file into common code - IA64 bits
• 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]