Eric W. Biederman wrote:
quoted text
> "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 10:51 PM, Eric W. Biederman
>> <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
>>> It appears that quite a few of the places you have changed are testing
>>> to see if an irq is valid.  The idiomatic way to perform that test in
>>> the kernel is:
>>>
>>> if (irq)
>> is uninitialized irq to be -1 or 0?
> 
> 0.  There is a long history behind it, but by decree of Linus and to conform
> with reasonable intuition 0 is not a valid irq except in certain arch specific
> corner cases.
> 
>>> With no test to see if you are >= NR_IRQS.
>>>
>>> I expect that is the change we want in the drivers that are performing such a
>> silly
>>> extra check.
>> is_irq_valid(irq_no) ?
>>
>> wait to see your new patchset about dyn irq_cfg and irq_desc
> 
> I haven't promised one, at least not lately.  I went down a couple of
> blind alleys and figured out what needed to be accomplished and then
> ran out of steam about a year and a half 2 years ago, and I haven't
> been able to get back to it.
> 
> Eric

I've put this on my queue of "items to examine more closely".  Priority-wise,
it's not quite at the front yet.

Thanks,
Mike
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/