Re: 8xx drivers for 2.6
From: Paul Mackerras <hidden>
Date: 2003-12-21 21:39:20
Tom Rini writes:
(serial), and in 2.6 having request_8xxirq becomes much uglier because of the irqreturn_t stuff (at least I couldn't make it happen w/o chaning <linux/interrupt.h>, and I never did figure out why cond_syscall() doesn't work in some files but not others.
Gaahhhh, I thought we had got rid of request_8xxirq. I don't want to see it come back. And this sort of thing is just bad:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff -Nru a/include/asm-ppc/mpc8xx.h b/include/asm-ppc/mpc8xx.h--- a/include/asm-ppc/mpc8xx.h Thu Dec 11 12:14:00 2003 +++ b/include/asm-ppc/mpc8xx.h Thu Dec 11 12:14:00 2003@@ -96,8 +96,10 @@ extern unsigned char __res[]; struct pt_regs; +typedef int irqreturn_t; /* FIXME -- Tom */ +
[snip]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff -Nru a/include/linux/interrupt.h b/include/linux/interrupt.h--- a/include/linux/interrupt.h Thu Dec 11 12:14:00 2003 +++ b/include/linux/interrupt.h Thu Dec 11 12:14:00 2003@@ -26,7 +26,9 @@ * IRQ_HANDLED means that we did have a valid interrupt and handled it. * IRQ_RETVAL(x) selects on the two depending on x being non-zero (for handled) */ +#ifndef __CONFIG_8xx_DEFS typedef int irqreturn_t; +#endif
Paul. ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/