Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC] disable_irq()/enable_irq() semantics and ide-probe.c | From | Benjamin Herrenschmidt <> | Date | Thu, 09 Oct 2003 10:07:15 +0200 |
| |
> > > > ObOtherFun: There's another bogosity in quoted ide-probe.c code, according > > to dwmw2 - he says that there are PCI IDE cards that get IRQ 0, so the > > test for hwif->irq is b0rken. We probably should stop overloading > > ->irq == 0 for "none given", but I'm not sure that we *have* a value > > that would never be used as an IRQ number on all platforms... > > The BIOS defines irq 0 in the PCI config space to be "no irq" as far as I > know, and on all PC platforms I've ever heard of it's not a usable irq for > generic PCI devices (it's wired to the timer thing). > > All PCI routing chipsets I know about also make "irq0" mean "disabled". > > Which is not to say that a badly configured setup might not do it, but it > really sounds fundamentally broken.
Well, irq 0 is a perfectly valid IRQ on a number of non-x86 platforms, some embedded platforms for example, and iirc, the Apple G5 even has the serverworks IDE on IRQ 0 ;)
That's why we have defined IRQ_NONE a while ago (this was in 2.4, I don'tk now if that made the trip to 2.6, I'm away from my sources at the moment).
Ben.
- 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/
| |