Subject: Re: [PATCH] ata: Don't use NO_IRQ in pata_of_platform driver

From: Jeff Garzik <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:34:30 -0500

On 11/10/2011 11:28 AM, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> Drivers should not use NO_IRQ; moreover, some architectures don't
> have it nowadays. '0' is the 'no irq' case.
>
> Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov<[email-masked]>
> Acked-by: Alan Cox<[email-masked]>
> ---
>
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 03:38:16PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 19:26:06 +0400
>> Anton Vorontsov<[email-masked]>  wrote:
>>
>>> Drivers should not use NO_IRQ; moreover, some architectures don't
>>> have it nowadays. '0' is the 'no irq' case.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov<[email-masked]>
>>
>> Acked-by: Alan Cox<[email-masked]>
>
> In case if we don't want a "band-aid fix" for 3.2, here is the patch
> that just does the proper fix (w/ a risk to break minor architectures).
>
>   drivers/ata/pata_of_platform.c |    2 +-
>   1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_of_platform.c b/drivers/ata/pata_of_platform.c
> index a72ab0d..2a472c5 100644
> --- a/drivers/ata/pata_of_platform.c
> +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_of_platform.c
> @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ static int __devinit pata_of_platform_probe(struct platform_device *ofdev)
>   	}
>
>   	ret = of_irq_to_resource(dn, 0,&irq_res);
> -	if (ret == NO_IRQ)
> +	if (!ret)
>   		irq_res.start = irq_res.end = 0;
>   	else
>   		irq_res.flags = 0;

Unless someone screams, that is what I'll push upstream.

	Jeff