[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A1CE907.2080601@goop.org>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 00:17:27 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC: the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/17] x86: add io_apic_ops to allow interception
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> ok, could you please turn the whole IO-APIC code into a driver
> framework? I.e. all IO-APIC calls outside of
> arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c should be to some io_apic-> method.
>
> The advantage will be a proper abstraction for all IO-APIC details -
> not just a minimalistic one for Xen's need.
>
> Also, please name it 'struct io_apic' - similar to the 'struct apic'
> naming we have for the local APIC driver structure.
OK, I'll have a look at it. I think it could turn out quite nicely, and
possibly remove the need for some other other Xen hooks around the
place, as well as make the path for some other other upcoming things
clearer.
But in the meantime, would you consider taking the minimal ops approach
for this next merge window, and the full api in the next dev cycle?
Thanks,
J
--
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