From patchwork Tue Dec 6 11:00:12 2011 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: ata: Don't use NO_IRQ in pata_of_platform driver From: Geert Uytterhoeven X-Patchwork-Id: 129612 Message-Id: To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Dave Martin , Nicolas Pitre , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Linus Torvalds , Anton Vorontsov , Alan Cox , Stephen Rothwell , Andrew Morton , devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, LKML , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Randy Dunlap , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Jeff Garzik , Pawel Moll , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 12:00:12 +0100 On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 11:46, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > But.. let's make one thing clear: Alan Cox and Linus have been going on > about how IRQ0 should not be used.  Let's be crystal clear: even x86 > uses IRQ0.  It happens to be the PIC timer, and that gets claimed early > on during the x86 boot.  So please don't tell me that x86 avoids IRQ0. > It doesn't.  It just happens that x86 never shows IRQ0 to anything but > the i8253 PIC driver. It's shown in /proc/interrupts due to a "bug" in show_interrupts(). The (gmail damaged) patch below fixes this bug. >From 46f51a2d42548358868a34df00c2a4e47bbdf691 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Geert Uytterhoeven Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 11:55:05 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] /proc/interrupts: irq zero is invalid As zero is an invalid irq number, show_interrupts() should not try to print it. Just return after printing the header for i == 0. Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven --- kernel/irq/proc.c | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/irq/proc.c b/kernel/irq/proc.c index 4bd4faa..5b8bbf0 100644 --- a/kernel/irq/proc.c +++ b/kernel/irq/proc.c @@ -439,6 +439,7 @@ int show_interrupts(struct seq_file *p, void *v) for_each_online_cpu(j) seq_printf(p, "CPU%-8d", j); seq_putc(p, '\n'); + return 0; } desc = irq_to_desc(i);