[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4920B911.7060504@kernel.org>
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 16:21:37 -0800
From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, mingo@...e.hu,
tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, travis@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sparse_irq aka dyn_irq v13
H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>> Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>>> 2. make irq number is bus/devfn/idx, and every dev func will use 12bit range, irq number is relatively fixed not like current MSI irq creating is some kind of floating from NR_IRQS too.
>>> 2 is *STILL WRONG*, dammit!
>>>
>>> You keep bringing this one up, but our PCI addressing is
>>> *DOMAIN*/bus/devfn -- it falls flat on its face when you have more than
>>> 16 PCI domains. CAN WE PLEASE STOP WITH THIS FOOLISHNESS NOW!
>> you want to u64 instead of unsigned int for irq?
>>
>
> No, I think the whole notion of a static *numeric* identifier for an IRQ
> when it's something like MSI-X is simply pointless. I think we should
> assign IRQ numbers beyond the legacy range dynamically.
>
> I really don't think anyone gives a hoot about the IRQ number for any
> IRQ above the 0-15 legacy range, even including the "APIC" numbers 16+.
you want to change ioapic/pin to irq mapping too?
so INTx and MSI will call create_irq_nr to get one irq for 16, and following first come and first serve rule.
YH
--
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