[PATCH 1/3] clocksource: rockchip: Make the driver more readability and compatible

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Thu, 17 Sep 2015, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 09/17/2015 11:28 AM, Caesar Wang wrote:
> > > I think the NO_IRQ definition is missing for ARM64.
> > 
> > Yep, Maybe better to compatible if we don't use the 'NO_IRQ',
> 
> Hmm, after digging into drivers/of/irq.c and kernel/irq/irqdomain.c
> 
> when there is an error it returns zero. So NO_IRQ and -1 are not correct and
> on the other side zero can be a valid irq. That sounds a little bit fuzzy to
> me.

IRQ0 is invalid for historical reasons. End of story.

Thanks,

	tglx