Re: [PATCH 1/7] [AVR32] don't check platform_get_irq's returnvalue against zero

[Hans-Christian Egtvedt]

On Tue, 2010-11-02 at 10:15 +0100, Uwe Kleine-KÃnig wrote: 
> Hello Hans-Christian,
> 
> On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 10:58:03AM +0100, Hans-Christian Egtvedt wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 08:45 +0200, Uwe Kleine-KÃnig wrote: 
> > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 05:10:03PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-KÃnig wrote:
> > > > platform_get_irq returns -ENXIO on failure, so !int_irq was probably
> > > > always true.  Better use (int)int_irq <= 0.  Note that a return value of
> > > > zero is still handled as error even though this could mean irq0.
> > 
> > Indeed, but external interrupts are numbered after the internal
> > interrupt lines, so in practice this does not happen. At least for now
> > with the AP700X series.
> > 
> > > > This is a followup to 305b3228f9ff4d59f49e6d34a7034d44ee8ce2f0 that
> > > > changed the return value of platform_get_irq from 0 to -ENXIO on error.
> > 
> > Thanks for this fix.
> > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-KÃnig <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: David Vrabel <dvrabel@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@xxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Acked-by: Hans-Christian Egtvedt <hans-christian.egtvedt@xxxxxxxxx>
> I thought this to go via the avr32 tree.  You "only" acked, so what tree
> do you consider here?

Right now there isn't any AVR32 tree, since I have yet to receive an
answer to my kernel.org account request. Could you push it through Linus
tree?

-- 
Hans-Christian Egtvedt

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