[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m11vfsgi13.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:15:20 -0800
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>
Cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
"x86\@kernel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linuxppc-dev\@ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...abs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irq: move some interrupt arch_* functions into struct irq_chip.
Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com> writes:
> On Wed, 2010-03-10 at 17:42 +0000, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>>
>> Ian Xen in this sense is simply not x86. irq_cfg is not acpi or
>> ioapic or anything but x86 specific. It has everything to do with
>> having a per cpu vector table of 256 entries and architecturally
>> receiving a vector number when an interrupt is fired.
>>
>> It totally makes sense for Xen to do something different because
>> architecturally it has a completely different irq subsystem.
>
> OK, so that sounds like you would like the same patchset but without the
> irq_cfg renaming? or potentially with renaming to x86_blah instead (I'll
> rework to your preference).
Currently the renaming really makes it unclear what you are doing and for
some reason the description of the renaming rubbed me the wrong way.
Eric
--
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