[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <86802c441001081243w246b581elfbf09fdaf18883b0@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 12:43:48 -0800
From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] x86: update nr_irqs according cpu num
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Eric W. Biederman
<ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:
> Based on my quick look the bad offenders (aka static sized arrays of
> NR_IRQS) all look at NR_IRQS not nr_irqs. So I don't see a point
> in having nr_irqs < NR_IRQS.
>
> So let's just kill arch_probe_nr_irqs() on x86.
>
> Then we can worry about things like fixing xen and the interrupt
> remapping code to not having NR_IRQS sized arrays.
arch/sh/kernel/irq.c:int __init arch_probe_nr_irqs(void)
arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c:int __init arch_probe_nr_irqs(void)
arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c: * if we move calling of
arch_probe_nr_irqs() after init_IRQ()
include/linux/interrupt.h:extern int arch_probe_nr_irqs(void);
kernel/irq/handle.c: arch_probe_nr_irqs();
kernel/softirq.c:int __init __weak arch_probe_nr_irqs(void)
sh have sparse_irq now...it has it's own copy for arch_probe_nr_irqs...
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