[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100316053717.GA10765@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 06:37:17 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] x86: handle legacy PIC interrupts on all the cpu's
* Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> wrote:
> On 03/15/2010 03:56 PM, Suresh Siddha wrote:
> > On Mon, 2010-03-15 at 14:51 -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> >>> + for (irq = 0; irq < legacy_pic->nr_legacy_irqs; irq++)
> >>> + if (!IO_APIC_IRQ(irq))
> >>> + per_cpu(vector_irq, cpu)[IRQ0_VECTOR + irq] = irq;
> >>
> >> seems those three lines are not needed...
> >
> > Those are needed for !CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC case.
> >
> then we can have
>
> +#ifndef CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC
> + for (irq = 0; irq < legacy_pic->nr_legacy_irqs; irq++)
> + per_cpu(vector_irq, cpu)[IRQ0_VECTOR + irq] = irq;
> +#endif
>
> then we don't punish most setup with ioapic controller.
Ok - i've simplified the code with the above and have added your Acked-by - is
that is fine by you?
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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