[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <D5C1322C3E673F459512FB59E0DDC32903445DBE@orsmsx414.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 12:19:03 -0700
From: "Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>
To: "Roland Dreier" <rdreier@...co.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
> 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?
I might have caused some confusion. You had asked if any drivers
support MSI but not MSI-X, so I threw 2 drivers out there that currently
support both, and why we support MSI for compatibility.
> 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.
MSI-X doesn't make much sense if you have 1 Rx queue on your NIC, since
1 vector essentially acts like MSI. In the case of why MSI-X could
fail, I have had it fail when I misconfigured my driver and didn't ask
for enough vectors for what I was assigning, so the driver disabled the
multiple Rx queues, and fell back to MSI.
I hope this helps.
-PJ
-
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