Re: [PATCH 1/2] net: ll_temac: fix interrupt bug when interrupt 0 is used
On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 11:29 -0600, John Linn wrote:
The code is not checking the interrupt for DMA correctly so that an
interrupt number of 0 will cause a false error.
Signed-off-by: Brian Hill brian.h...@xilinx.com
Signed-off-by: John Linn john.l...@xilinx.com
---
drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c b/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c
index fa7620e..0615737 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c
@@ -950,7 +950,7 @@ temac_of_probe(struct of_device *op, const struct
of_device_id *match)
lp-rx_irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 0);
lp-tx_irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 1);
- if (!lp-rx_irq || !lp-tx_irq) {
+ if ((lp-rx_irq == NO_IRQ) || (lp-tx_irq == NO_IRQ)) {
dev_err(op-dev, could not determine irqs\n);
rc = -ENOMEM;
goto nodev;
Hasn't NO_IRQ been deprecated ?
Linus made it clear a while back that interrupt 0 was not valid and
that's the way it should be.
We now have an interrupt remapping scheme on powerpc, so we ensure that
0 always mean no interrupt. Other archs might need some fixups. Which
are specifically needs this patch ?
Cheers,
Ben.
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 1/2] net: ll_temac: fix interrupt bug when interrupt 0 is used
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
b...@kernel.crashing.org wrote:
On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 11:29 -0600, John Linn wrote:
The code is not checking the interrupt for DMA correctly so that an
interrupt number of 0 will cause a false error.
Signed-off-by: Brian Hill brian.h...@xilinx.com
Signed-off-by: John Linn john.l...@xilinx.com
---
drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c b/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c
index fa7620e..0615737 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c
@@ -950,7 +950,7 @@ temac_of_probe(struct of_device *op, const struct
of_device_id *match)
lp-rx_irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 0);
lp-tx_irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 1);
- if (!lp-rx_irq || !lp-tx_irq) {
+ if ((lp-rx_irq == NO_IRQ) || (lp-tx_irq == NO_IRQ)) {
dev_err(op-dev, could not determine irqs\n);
rc = -ENOMEM;
goto nodev;
Hasn't NO_IRQ been deprecated ?
ARM still uses it, plus less than a handful of other arches. There is
no reason for Microblaze to use NO_IRQ as -1.
In fact, on ARM, as part of the device tree work I'm hoping to piggy
back in irq remapping and make 0 no longer a valid irq.
Linus made it clear a while back that interrupt 0 was not valid and
that's the way it should be.
We now have an interrupt remapping scheme on powerpc, so we ensure that
0 always mean no interrupt. Other archs might need some fixups. Which
are specifically needs this patch ?
Microblaze.
BTW jlinn, for xilinx ARM support we should make sure 0 is never used
as a valid IRQ from day one. It will result it far less pain in the
future.
g.
--
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 1/2] net: ll_temac: fix interrupt bug when interrupt 0 is used
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:12 PM, John Williams
john.willi...@petalogix.com wrote:
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 3:29 AM, John Linn john.l...@xilinx.com wrote:
The code is not checking the interrupt for DMA correctly so that an
interrupt number of 0 will cause a false error.
Signed-off-by: Brian Hill brian.h...@xilinx.com
Signed-off-by: John Linn john.l...@xilinx.com
---
drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c b/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c
index fa7620e..0615737 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c
@@ -950,7 +950,7 @@ temac_of_probe(struct of_device *op, const struct
of_device_id *match)
lp-rx_irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 0);
lp-tx_irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 1);
- if (!lp-rx_irq || !lp-tx_irq) {
+ if ((lp-rx_irq == NO_IRQ) || (lp-tx_irq == NO_IRQ)) {
Personally I think this is the right thing to do. But, I thought the
IRQ 0 == NO_IRQ (AKA all-the-world's-an-x86-and-if-not-it-should-be)
holy war was already fought and won (or lost, depending on your
perspective)?
I seem to recall giving reluctant assent to a patch from Grant a few
months ago that touched MicroBlaze thus?
I've still got the patch in my private queue. I can reapply it, test
it and repost it. I think what was still a bit up in the air was the
exact method to map hw irq numbers onto linux irqs.
g.
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
[PATCH 1/2] net: ll_temac: fix interrupt bug when interrupt 0 is used
The code is not checking the interrupt for DMA correctly so that an
interrupt number of 0 will cause a false error.
Signed-off-by: Brian Hill brian.h...@xilinx.com
Signed-off-by: John Linn john.l...@xilinx.com
---
drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c b/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c
index fa7620e..0615737 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c
@@ -950,7 +950,7 @@ temac_of_probe(struct of_device *op, const struct
of_device_id *match)
lp-rx_irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 0);
lp-tx_irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 1);
- if (!lp-rx_irq || !lp-tx_irq) {
+ if ((lp-rx_irq == NO_IRQ) || (lp-tx_irq == NO_IRQ)) {
dev_err(op-dev, could not determine irqs\n);
rc = -ENOMEM;
goto nodev;
--
1.6.2.1
This email and any attachments are intended for the sole use of the named
recipient(s) and contain(s) confidential information that may be proprietary,
privileged or copyrighted under applicable law. If you are not the intended
recipient, do not read, copy, or forward this email message or any attachments.
Delete this email message and any attachments immediately.
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 1/2] net: ll_temac: fix interrupt bug when interrupt 0 is used
From: John Linn john.l...@xilinx.com Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 11:29:18 -0600 The code is not checking the interrupt for DMA correctly so that an interrupt number of 0 will cause a false error. Signed-off-by: Brian Hill brian.h...@xilinx.com Signed-off-by: John Linn john.l...@xilinx.com Applied. ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 1/2] net: ll_temac: fix interrupt bug when interrupt 0 is used
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 3:29 AM, John Linn john.l...@xilinx.com wrote:
The code is not checking the interrupt for DMA correctly so that an
interrupt number of 0 will cause a false error.
Signed-off-by: Brian Hill brian.h...@xilinx.com
Signed-off-by: John Linn john.l...@xilinx.com
---
drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c b/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c
index fa7620e..0615737 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ll_temac_main.c
@@ -950,7 +950,7 @@ temac_of_probe(struct of_device *op, const struct
of_device_id *match)
lp-rx_irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 0);
lp-tx_irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 1);
- if (!lp-rx_irq || !lp-tx_irq) {
+ if ((lp-rx_irq == NO_IRQ) || (lp-tx_irq == NO_IRQ)) {
Personally I think this is the right thing to do. But, I thought the
IRQ 0 == NO_IRQ (AKA all-the-world's-an-x86-and-if-not-it-should-be)
holy war was already fought and won (or lost, depending on your
perspective)?
I seem to recall giving reluctant assent to a patch from Grant a few
months ago that touched MicroBlaze thus?
John
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
