Hi Russell,
I'm about to merge this fix into 2.4. It's already been fixed in 2.6.
Do you have any objection ?
BTW, I have two email addresses for you, the one in the MAINTAINERS file
and the one you use on LKML. Which one do you prefer ? Just in case, I've
used both.
Thanks in advance,
Willy
>From f3779aa6e0b38c0dfdad4f98b6bcddcd570b6aa7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Willy Tarreau <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 22:00:12 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] arm: incorrect use of "&&" instead of "&"
In integrator_init_irq(), the use of "&&" in the following
statement causes all interrupts to be marked valid regardless
of INTEGRATOR_SC_VALID_INT, as long as it's non-zero :
if (((1 << i) && INTEGRATOR_SC_VALID_INT) != 0)
Obvious fix is to replace it with "&". This was already fixed
in 2.6.
Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau <[email protected]>
---
arch/arm/mach-integrator/irq.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-integrator/irq.c b/arch/arm/mach-integrator/irq.c
index 69d2e67..cc56534 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-integrator/irq.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-integrator/irq.c
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ void __init integrator_init_irq(void)
unsigned int i;
for (i = 0; i < NR_IRQS; i++) {
- if (((1 << i) && INTEGRATOR_SC_VALID_INT) != 0) {
+ if (((1 << i) & INTEGRATOR_SC_VALID_INT) != 0) {
irq_desc[i].valid = 1;
irq_desc[i].probe_ok = 1;
irq_desc[i].mask_ack = sc_mask_irq;
--
1.4.2.4
-
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/
[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]
