[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aday7hac2vf.fsf@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 12:05:24 -0700
From: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
To: "Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>
Cc: "Nelson, Shannon" <shannon.nelson@...el.com>,
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<davem@...emloft.net>, <jeff@...zik.org>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"Leech, Christopher" <christopher.leech@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] I/OAT: Add support for MSI and MSI-X
> Both igb (recently posted) and ixgbe (also recently posted) support both
> MSI and MSI-X. Right now when we try to request MSI-X vectors, if we
> fail to acquire what we've asked for, we fall back to MSI support. If
> MSI fails to initialize, we fall back to legacy interrupts. So it needs
> to be there in case MSI-X allocation fails for the NIC driver.
Hmm, I see I don't understand what this driver is doing. What is a
"struct ioatdma_device"? Is this driver requesting interrupts that
come from the NIC or the IOAT DMA engine?
Anyway, if the NICs support MSI-X, is there any chance of failing to
get one MSI-X vectors but then succeeding in getting MSI enabled?
How could that happen? I don't see what falling back to MSI buys you
beyond more code.
- R.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists