From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S933256Ab1LFLEF (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 6 Dec 2011 06:04:05 -0500
Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:42752 "EHLO
	caramon.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S933185Ab1LFLED (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 6 Dec 2011 06:04:03 -0500
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 11:03:28 +0000
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Dave Martin <dave.martin@linaro.org>,
        Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@gmail.com>,
        Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@redhat.com>,
        Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ata: Don't use NO_IRQ in pata_of_platform driver
Message-ID: <20111206110328.GP14542@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
References: <1322867573.11728.22.camel@pasglop> <20111205161157.GA27550@localhost.localdomain> <alpine.LFD.2.02.1112051236350.2357@xanadu.home> <20111205180253.GB29812@localhost.localdomain> <alpine.LFD.2.02.1112051310150.2357@xanadu.home> <20111205192605.GD29812@localhost.localdomain> <alpine.LFD.2.02.1112051443190.2357@xanadu.home> <20111206093709.GB2274@linaro.org> <20111206104654.GN14542@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <CAMuHMdXvuwXps7j2jz18aB1VueLh5Vn0m94jLvBEO-CmsG1JxQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdXvuwXps7j2jz18aB1VueLh5Vn0m94jLvBEO-CmsG1JxQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 12:00:12PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 11:46, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> 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.

So we now try to hide the fact that there _is_ an interrupt called 0
on x86 systems?  Sorry, I can't that that seriously in any way.