[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <8440180C-A3B1-4436-9CDF-C6BA9A01F8CD@kernel.crashing.org>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 08:43:11 -0500
From: Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>
To: benh@...nel.crashing.org
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, akpm@...l.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
torvalds@...l.org, maxk@...lcomm.com, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] genirq: Set initial default irq affinity to just CPU0
On Oct 26, 2008, at 1:33 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-10-25 at 21:04 -0700, David Miller wrote:
>> But back to my original wonder, since I've always tipped off of this
>> generic IRQ layer cpu mask, when was it ever defaulting to zero
>> and causing the behvaior your powerpc guys actually want? :-)
>
> Well, I'm not sure what Kumar wants. Most powerpc SMP setups actually
> want to spread interrupts to all CPUs, and those who can't tend to
> just
> not implement set_affinity... So Kumar must have a special case of
> MPIC
> usage here on FSL platforms.
>
> In any case, the platform limitations should be dealt with there or
> the
> user could break it by manipulating affinity via /proc anyway.
>
> By yeah, I do expect default affinity to be all CPUs and in fact, I
> even
> have an -OLD- comment in the code that says
>
> /* let the mpic know we want intrs. default affinitya is
> 0xffffffff ...
While we have the comment the code appears not to really follow it.
We appear to write 1 << hard_smp_processor_id().
- k
--
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