[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1340067097.3696.6.camel@sbsiddha-desk.sc.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 17:51:37 -0700
From: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>
To: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...hat.com>
Cc: yinghai@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
gorcunov@...nvz.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86, irq: update irq_cfg domain unless the new
affinity is a subset of the current domain
On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 11:17 +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
> I would suggest to go further and generalize your idea and introduce something
> like compare_domains() instead sub_domain flag. This would help us to keep/let
> __assign_irq_vector() be more generic and hide domains treating logic in
> drivers.
That sounds good.
> @@ -1138,47 +1138,50 @@ __assign_irq_vector(int irq, struct irq_cfg *cfg, const struct cpumask *mask)
> int new_cpu;
> int vector, offset;
> bool more_domains;
> + int cmp_domains;
>
> - more_domains = apic->vector_allocation_domain(cpu, tmp_mask);
> + more = apic->vector_allocation_domain(cpu, mask, tmp_mask);
> + cmp = apic->compare_domains(tmp_mask, cfg->domain);
I think we should be able to consolidate both of them into one
apic_driver specific routine. Also I think we should be able to use the
tmp_mask in each round and minimize the number of unnecessary
for_each_cpu iterations. And that should clean up the more_domains bool
logic we did earlier.
Will post the complete patch in a day.
thanks,
suresh
--
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