[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <86802c441001081850s4965fca3y4cba3782d3eaeec6@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 18:50:29 -0800
From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"ebiederm@...ssion.com" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] x86, apic: use 0x20 for the IRQ_MOVE_CLEANUP_VECTOR
instead of 0x1f
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 6:19 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> However, my most serious concern with this patch is that there is a
> fairly significant change due to this patch, which is that the legacy
> IRQ vectors now fall *inside* the FIRST_DEVICE_VECTOR range. This isn't
> a bad thing -- in fact, it is fundamentally the right thing to do
> especially once we consider platforms which *don't* have the legacy IRQs
> -- but it makes me scared of unexpected behavior changes as a result.
> If you feel confident that that is not the case, could you outline why
> it shouldn't be a problem?
>
if it is not used by ioapic instead of legacy,
do we need to re assign irq0 to irq15 domain from all cpus to
apic->vector_allocation_domain()?
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